Kamal Uddin Ahmed
IN A contentious decision handed down on June 5, the High Court of Bangladesh ordered the government to reinstate the 30 per cent reservation for the children and grandchildren of freedom fighters in all public sector jobs, cadre and non-cadre alike. University students across the country have been speaking out and protesting more frequently since the court’s verdict.
The ruling was given after disposing of a 2021 writ petition filed by the offspring of a freedom fighter and six others challenging the legality of abolishing quotas for freedom fighters. It may be recalled here that, amidst huge protests across the country, the government was compelled to abolish the protracted quota system in a circular on October 4, 2018.
The offspring of the freedom fighter claimed that the government had abolished the freedom fighters’ quota by violating a 2012 High Court verdict that asked the government to preserve a 30 per cent quota for them in government services. The judgement was later affirmed by the Appellate Division.
Perceived as illegal, discriminatory and unjust, students from different universities and campaigners of the 2018 quota reform movement and Chhatra Odiikhar Parishad staged protest rallies against the HC verdict for reinstatement of the quota on June 6.
Students assert that such quotas ignore the principle of merit and equal opportunity guaranteed in Article 29 of the constitution. For that reason, they called to rescind the order. It is apparent that the students will again launch robust movements similar to the 2018 movements unless the HC ruling is upturned.
The discriminating quota system was introduced by an executive order in 1972, immediately after the liberation of the country. It was retained for decades, although amended a little bit quite a few times. It was adopted to promote representation from diverse backgrounds in a war-torn country and guarantee their participation in the decision-making process.
The 56 per cent quota reservation was allocated as follows during the recruitment process: 30 per cent was reserved for freedom fighters’ and their dependents, 10 per cent for disadvantaged districts, 10 per cent for women, 5 per cent for underprivileged ethnic minorities and 1 per cent for people with disabilities. Thus, only 44 per cent of contenders were allowed to secure government jobs on the basis of merit. The freedom fighters and their children had been given priority in the recruitment process. A meagre 20 per cent of candidates were appointed to the civil service on the basis of merit from 1972 to 1976. Nevertheless, the percentage of merit staffing in the civil service increased to 44 per cent after 1985.
To promote efficient governance and produce suitable policies to accomplish the nation’s sustainable development goals, the quota system has hindered the cultivation of a cadre of highly competent, capable, and high-achieving government officials.
Whereas, a strong civil service mainly based on the merit principle is vital for achieving effective and efficient administration in a country. Sections (1) and (2) of Article 29 of the Bangladesh Constitution guarantee the principle of equal opportunity in government employment. However, Article 29(3)(a) provides for an exclusion to that and offers the government’s discretion to pursue ‘affirmative action’ in favour of underprivileged citizens for ensuring their representation in the public service.
The concept of a merit-based employment system was first introduced in ancient imperial China during the Han dynasty. It was adopted by British India and by Europe almost two and a half centuries later. In the United States, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 mandated the merit system to provide ‘the people of the United States with a competent, honest, and productive workforce… and to improve the quality of public service…’
In Britain also, Section 10 of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 required that the selection of personnel for the civil service ‘be on merit’ and ‘on the basis of fair and open competition’. Similarly, merit remains a fundamental feature of the Australian Public Service under Section 10A of the Australian Public Service Act 1999. Thus, most developed states underscore merit-based recruitment and promotion systems.
The successive Bangladesh governments, with the help of the UNDP and the ADB, established several reform commissions and committees for reorganising the civil service. In March 1972, the first Awami League government led by the founding father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, established an Administrative and Services Reorganisation Committee to review the administrative system.
Distinguished scholar and Dhaka University vice chancellor Professor Muzaffar Ahmed Choudhury presided over the committee that vehemently supported a merit-based selection process for civil service appointments. The Administrative and Services Reorganisation Committee asserted that the ‘quota system’ would ‘defeat the purpose of building up a first-rate civil service’ in the country.
Another inclusive appraisal for restructuring the quota system was carried out by former Regulatory Commission chair and adviser to the caretaker government, Akbar Ali Khan, and former secretary Raquib Uddin Ahmed in March 2008. Dubbing the existing system as ‘faulty’, they emphasised that the ‘Quota [system] for civil service recruitment cannot continue for an indefinite time’.
However, the Administrative and Services Reorganisation Committee recommendations and later appraisals by eminent civil servants were ignored by successive governments. Possibly it was political considerations that justified the retention of the freedom fighters’ children and grandchildren and district quotas in public services for such a long time.
On March 21, 2018, prime minister Sheikh Hasina stated that the quota system for freedom fighters and their descendants would be maintained in recognition of the former’s supreme sacrifices for the country. That signalled her government’s unwillingness to change the prevailing quota system. The statement disappointed quota reform campaigners and public administration experts.
Prime minister Sheikh Hasina most likely overlooked the fact that the freedom fighters fought against the Pakistani military regime mainly for two reasons: first, to liberate the country from blatant ‘economic disparity ‘and second, to build ‘justice’ ‘equality’ and an ‘exploitation-free’ democratic Bangladesh.
The unfair quota system has long denied access to public service to many qualified individuals. According to public policy specialist expert Dr Habib Zafarullah, successive administrations have failed to both detect and fix the system’s shortcomings while simultaneously making it work better and providing the necessary benefits to society. In terms of quality and standards, Bangladesh’s international competitiveness has taken a hit due to the district-based quota and the continuation of the quota for the offspring of the freedom fighters.
Dismayed students of various public and private universities across the country have repeatedly called for reforms of the civil service. Between April 2018 and July 2018, thousands of students staged nationwide protest rallies against the quota system, labelling it as highly unfair and unjust.
Protests and rallies by students demanding a reform of the unusual quota system upset the Hasina government. The government was disconcerted by the agitated student protests and rallies to reform the bizarre quota system. In Dhaka, properties were damaged, and chaos reigned as law enforcement authorities and anti-quota protesters were engaged in violent clashes. The police used tear gas and rubber bullets while apprehending a large number of demonstrators, injuring many students.
The government came under intense pressure for an inclusive reform of the quota system. Amidst nationwide demonstrations by students and civil service aspirants, on April 11, 2018, the prime minister told parliament that the quota system would be scrapped. The ministry of public administration then issued a gazette statement abolishing the quota system for hiring class I and II positions in the public service.
Thus, the government was forced to comply with the reasonable demands of students and job seekers and decided to end the 46-year-old extraordinary quota system. The action upheld the concepts of ‘equal opportunity’ and the ‘rule of law’ for all citizens.
The restoration of the illogical quota for the freedom fighter’s offspring again through a High Court ruling has reopened huge discontentment among university students all over the country. On June 9, the state filed an appeal with the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court against the High Court verdict that had restored a 30 per cent quota for the freedom fighters’ children in government jobs.
The Chamber Judge of the Appellate Division, Justice M Enayetur Rahim, has set aside July 4 for hearing the appeal before the full bench of the Appellate Division. The highest court in the country will review the verdict of the HC and permanently resolve the issue.
The desperate university students have issued a warning, threatening to take more drastic measures if the HC order remains unreversed. The court’s disregard for merit in staffing appears to be a major setback for improving the civil service, efficiently meeting critical challenges, and maintaining competitiveness with the advanced countries of the world.
NEW AGE
