WHAT we have seen happen all over the country after the CEC announcement of the election schedule is a very good example of the effect of profligate politics in Bangladesh. On first day count seven people are dead. Who knows what happens in the coming days.
There has been incremental growth in the level of violent activities during opposition political programmes, in the last one year in particular. And that leads one to ask why there is a spurt of violence now when the previous three years had been rather peaceful in terms of the days of hartals and the attendant hostility. While not for a moment condoning the acts of arson and destruction of lives and property, which is absolutely unacceptable, one must ponder if the opposition has been forced to adopt the posture as the only way to make the government ‘listen’? This is not to justify violence but to establish a causal link between the character of our democracy, which is becoming incrementally illiberal too, and the level of violence.
Violence as a strategy has much to do with the shrinking political space available to the opposition. To impede political activity of the opposition, to talk of dialogue on one hand and take on remand senior opposition leaders on the other and the wholesale arrest of opposition cadres, smacks of inane politics. One could also ask whether the level of force used by the law enforcing agencies to quell violent situations has been proportionate. And here the government cannot shirk its responsibility for the current state of political violence in the country.
If illiberal democracy is a growth industry as Fareed Zakaria avers, than perhaps Bangladesh has not contributed a little to that. The present government elected democratically and with nearly 90% seats in the parliament and more than 40% votes, seems to believe that it has a mandate to act in any way it sees fit as long as it holds regular elections. A majoritarian rule steam-rolls its policies disregarding public opinion.
Regrettably, what we have now is a bad mixture of illiberal democracy and decadent political culture where power has become the focus of all activities. What we have is an elected despotism where “I am the state” is becoming patently obvious. And thus many tend to believe that Hasina is moving single-mindedly towards the objective she had fixed two years ago. That is, how to keep the BNP out of the parliamentary elections. And it seems that she has so far managed to keep on her track, although her plans have been seen through by the perceptive public given the way she has tried to control the political development recently.
If one was not convinced so far about the opposition demand for a neutral government to oversee the election then the recent steps of the prime minister should remove all reservations about the urgent need for a CTG.
One would not be remiss to ask if the government has lost its way. To any ordinary person it would appear so, much as the PM tries to make it appear otherwise. And in its efforts to be in control of things, sometimes more by coercion than logic, and sometimes by abusing not so much the letter but the spirit of the constitution, the government is becoming both illiberal in attitude and profligate in action.
The first indication of a government’s illiberality is the divesting the clout of the democratic institutions making those pliant to the government diktats. And one of the blatant acts of political recklessness has been the 15th Amendment that did away with the caretaker system. And we have in these columns yesterday discussed how the EC has been made into a virtual appendage of the ruling party.
And of late the letter of the Constitution, something that the PM has been talking so vociferously to uphold at all costs, has been violated too. Starting from the resignation drama to setting up of a so-called ‘poll-time’ government, of which nothing is stated in the Constitution. The ‘poll-time’ government is also acting beyond its remit of doing ‘routine work.’ One wonders whether the signing of Ticfa will not be challenged in court in the future. Her commitment to follow the advice of the Supreme Court that the Sangsad should be dissolved 42 days before the elections seems to have escaped the PM’s notice.
And all that we have seen occur in the country so far have been done in the “name of the people and for the sake of democracy.” If that were so why are both in such a perilous state?
Source: The Daily Star
A great article and very good observations. But who are we trying to educate – the PM and her cronies (that include her boot-licking civil society)? A bad try – after all, a criminal has little or no time to heed the words of wisdom!
Many can ask: was such siege, hartal, cocktail raining etc – such an anarchic situation – very necessary? The answer may be both yes and no. Considering the thickness of the hide, a rhino cannot be tamed with a hypodermic injection; but a small dose of morphine can make you unconscious. In the countries where parliamentary system of govt runs, ministers resign shouldering the responsibility for a mishap under his ministry, though he is hardly personally responsible for that. Such an event happened in Latvia just the other day and may times in India. But as for our leaders even a vicious pinch can hardly make our Ministers make a blink. So what has the opposition to do except taking such a painful recourse? But at the same time it’s not at all desirable. Why should a country suffer for the evil deeds of the men in power?