It is all in bad taste. Former prime minister and BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia has accused Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's son of being in possession of $300 million. She has wanted to know about the source of the money in Sajeeb Wazed Joy's account. For his part, the prime minister's son, who happens to be ICT Advisor to his mother, has hit back with a Facebook status. He wanted to know from the BNP Chief where exactly all that money she claims he has happens to be. He has challenged the BNP Chief and asked her to substantiate her claim, saying that if her allegation is correct he will give away the amount to orphans.  
Obviously, it is a war of words, often below the belt that we see going on here. It is an unsavoury sight when a former prime minister is pitted against the child of her political rival in circumstances that certainly do not do us proud. For Begum Zia, it is certainly understandable that she will take issue with the powers that be if she thinks the government is involved in wrongdoing. If she has evidence that the government or the ruling Awami League has been indulging in corruption, that indeed those in power have siphoned off Tk.30,000 crore, that the government has been stealing, she is within her right to make general statements of such a nature. Most politicians do. If she had stated that the prime minister's son was engaged in corrupt dealings, one would have taken it as a typical political position adopted by her, in the tradition of South Asian politics.
The difficulty arises elsewhere. Having been prime minister twice (some claim she was thrice in power), and having presided over the fortunes of her political party for more than three decades, Khaleda Zia ought to have been more circumspect, indeed more mature in her statement on the Tk. 30,000 crore or $300 million issue. More importantly, she should have been more specific on the charges she has brought against Joy. No one will argue with the right of any individual to put it across that some other citizen might not have been above board on certain issues critical for the nation. The fact is that Khaleda Zia's accusations have now prompted Joy to ask her where the allegedly stolen money happens to be. Without saying so in so many words, the young man has conveyed the impression that the former prime minister's accusations are defamatory in nature and therefore could be open to legal prosecution. It will be sheer irresponsibility, albeit a crime, if Begum Zia cannot or does not substantiate her accusations against Joy as well as the government. Already a Tk one-crore defamation case has been filed against Khaleda Zia in Comilla on Tuesday.
That brings us to the idea of what mature politics is all about. It is simple: political leaders at different stages, on the basis of their experience and around the question of the leadership they have exercised so far, need to put on their finest political behavior in the country. Probity is of the essence here. If Begum Zia has any evidence of the corruption, indeed the cyber heist of state resources and of other transgressions, she will be doing the country a huge favour by letting us know where the documents pertaining to the theft happen to be. It is not right that a veteran political leader, which Khaleda Zia surely is, speak on issues without substance. Khaleda Zia is an individual with broad appeal among her followers. She has also had the experience of heading the government in the past and quite clearly happens to be eyeing the future as well. Unfortunately, such realities have not been taken cognizance of in her coming forward with 'revelations' about the prime minister's son. Those 'revelations' ought to have been backed by concrete evidence. That way, the country could have benefited. Her party's Joint Secretary General Ruhul Kabir Rizvi on Tuesday claimed that Begum Zia told about Joy's $300m "based on information". The nation has a right to know the 'information' from her.
Of course, we do not believe that people close to the corridors of power or already there are free to do as they will.  We do not believe that the prime minister's child or anyone else is above the law. Calling the former prime minister a "thief" calls for hard evidence. Let the law take its own course, here as well as elsewhere. But before that happens, it is necessary that influential individuals first persuade themselves that they have the evidence or substance needed to underscore their arguments in ways that uphold their image before the country. There is always a difference between a harangue and a conversation. It is all right for a political leader, any political leader, to indulge in populism before a crowd. More importantly, it is essential that words and phrases are not carelessly bandied or thrown around. In the present circumstances, there is the danger that what the former prime minister has not supported by hard evidence could well be questioned in court. The reason is simple: it is one thing to level a general accusation against an organization, but it is quite another, and much more serious, to make sweeping charges against individuals. That would be tantamount to playing to the gallery. For clarity and political courtesy Begum Zia should either prove her accusation against the government and Sajeeb Wazed Joy or apologise for her derogatory and unsubstantiated allegations.
Let such politics stop here. And, yes, if there are reasons to think corruption has been indulged in by an individual, let it be exposed on the strength of proof.
That Tk 30,000cr or  $300 million are not to be made light. Through the unsupported and bitterness of words, political savvy must not be made a casualty.