The image of the country is not tarnished by what Khadijatul Kubra said, but rather when she is put in jail for the 'crime' of speaking. The honorable judge, who quashed the two cases against Khadija, not only delivered justice but also raised the image of the court and to some extent the country.
3. Who decides whether someone's speech tarnishes the country's image or not? The police of Kalabagan and New Market police stations had registered a case against Khadija. Is an officer in charge of a police station or a sub-inspector qualified to take such a decision considering what adverse opinion Khadija's words might provoke on the other side of the world? Or has the police been given complete authority to take any kind of decision?
4. I think psychiatrists can also look into the other aspect of this case. Why were the police and government law officers so adamant and intent on jailing this young girl who was under 18 years of age at the time of her arrest?
Even though she has been arrested, it would be very natural to feel some degree of sympathy towards such a young girl. But instead, it was ensured that he was not granted bail in the judicial court. On 16 February 2022, the High Court granted bail to Khadija. This could have ended the matter, but then why did they appeal to the Chamber Court to suspend Khadija's bail order?
Murderers, rapists, terrorists come out of jail and walk freely on bail, then put pressure on the victims to withdraw the cases. This girl had no such opportunity. When a hardened criminal leaves the country by air, orders for his detention reach the airport two hours after his departure. This girl was hardly capable of such actions. Then why was there so much desperation to stop his bail?