A historical verdict, a historical truth, is a historical truth.

A division bench of the High Court has declared a historic verdict today. Bangabandhu has declared independence in Bangladesh, this historic political truth has been made legal truth, through this verdict.

According to the various media reports, this verdict is about:

1. The High Court has declared that the publication of "Bangladesh Liberation War documentary" was released in the market since 2004, has been unconstitutional, illegal and canceled.

2. Sales, distribution and reprint of all the publications which have been named by Ziaur Rahman as the announcer of liberation war has been banned.

3. This verdict has been said that those who distorted this information have committed criminal acts against this nation and the constitution.

4. The High Court mentions that the government should take legal action against those responsible for this distortion. Besides,

5. The High Court has issued directions to the government to take effective measures to include the true history of freedom struggle in all the level of the curriculum of the country.

A question:
Does the name of Ziaur Rahman as the declaration of independence or any document published by BNP's own publications? My hundred percent believe that it must be there. Then -
why can these publications be seized immediately due to the verdict of Ziaur Rahman being declared as the proclaimer of independence from the organizational publications of the BNP since its inception?

If it goes, if it is to be effective, then what is the political wisdom and commitment that is necessary for effective (especially the forces of independence), especially at this time, any political initiative and commitment?