In a party system of democratic politics, the normal practice is to follow the instructions of politburo and party high command to support the nominee of the party candidate during election without any judgment of his popularity or eligibility to be a candidate. This is the normal way of party politics practiced round the world. Bangladesh should not be an exception to it. Nevertheless, the party followers are very frequently defying the discipline and contesting against their party nominated candidates in elections.
Very recently, there was a call by a party president to its members to support the party candidates to be nominated in the ensuing 10th Parliament election even if they appear to be incompetent and unpopular.
Party discipline tends to be very strong in Westminster systems, particularly in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and India in which a vote by a parliament member against the party in power might cause the government to collapse in the event of no-confidence motion. This type of floor crossing is sometimes very detrimental to the party and to the nation. Party leaders therefore, often retain the authority to expel members of the party who violates the party line and its decisions. Breaking party discipline in parliamentary votes can result in a number of penalties for the members who dissents. These penalties include disciplinary actions including losing benefits of elected office facilities.
In the Marxist-Leninist political systems, such an indiscipline or disagreement with party caucus might get administrative sanctions like fines or expulsions considering it as corruption. In countries, like New Zealand, which use M M P (mixed-member proportionality) system of voting, party discipline tends to be very high because of the element of risks involved.
If they do not vote the party line, they take the risk of being demoted on the list in the next election and not returning to the parliament.
In a country like ours, people cast votes in favour of a party candidate provided the party pledges in their manifesto of reformations and significant courses of actions acceptable to public in general. Maintaining a party cadres like the communist world is absent in Bangladesh. Some young people pretend themselves to be strong supporters of the party to gain from tender and avail other benefit.
In 1956, there was an election in the then Pakistan where combined alliance (Jukta Front) made a landslide victory since Huq-Bhashani alliance made commitments of massive development and systematic reformations. It happened so; even the voter failed to know the name of a candidate but voted for the alliance symbol. Such a situation prevailed again in 1970 while public supported the Awami League candidates without knowing the details of the background of a candidate but on a particular issue. In fact, in the election of 9th Parliament held in December 2008, public voted massively since the 14-party alliance committed for Digital Bangladesh with the charter of changes in the governances of the nation. In precise, there are instances to support a candidate on his personal image and relationship. If the issues and agenda of the party are imperceptible and impalpable, voters in general and party activists in particular, do not feel tempted to be committed.
In the past, especially in 2006 December, print and electronic media were vocal describing stories of nominations of candidates in consideration of their capability of contributions to the party fund in addition to their cognizable support from the electorates. Therefore, there were many rebellion candidates to contest disowning the party dictum. Thus, merchants and members of the chambers of commerce and industries dominated the 9th National Parliament of Bangladesh.
People are in great apprehension, there might be such repetition of nominating merchants and tycoons in the coming 10th parliament election by all parties and alliances. In fact, social workers and dedicated development activists are no more in race to be MPs of the National Parliament since contesting in the parliamentary election costs much. Besides, a candidate is to support a group of obedient followers as musclemen to speak in his favour and sometimes to gag the voice of the opposition party trying to influence the voters against him. Thus, a candidate for a big constituency need to have resources in terms of money and manpower and strong base for lobbying in his favour.
Therefore, winning in the election is not promises of noble works and testimony of the transparency. It is more than that. It is really a challenge to create a climate conducive to bring image of a competent candidate. Thus, the nomination from a party must be prudent one to win the contest.
Unfortunately, to get such nomination, a prospective candidate is to consolidate his supports within the party by mitigating any resentment. There are instances of rebel candidates from the party itself in spite of all efforts by the party high-ups to resolve any confusion. During the city corporation election, party people did not like the nomination of Gazipur-Tongi, Narayangonj, Comilla, from Bangladesh Awami League candidates for the mayorship and many of them opposed openly. In such a situation of disregarding the party discipline, presidium of the party should have disciplinary actions against the rebel candidate. Bangladesh Awami League refrained from doing so which may encourage many to defy party decorum.
Therefore, just calling the party workers to vote in favour of nominated party candidate is not enough to restore discipline in the party system of politics. Party discipline is important for all systems of governments that allow parties to hold power.
In pluralistic and multi-party parliamentary democratic system, discipline is more important. In order to maintain the same and involve the hardcore party activists, it is necessary to organise frequent interactions within the party and discuss threadbare its weaknesses and strengths. In Bangladesh, there is rare a culture so far developed to consult party workers on routine basis and to follow democracy within the party itself. These are real threats to democracy to sustain for a long time.
Party chief takes the course of issuing instructions without listening to the voice of grassroots workers. This weak party line is great threat to grow the party with democratic norms and practice. Hope in near future, politicians might realise the truth and evaluate their weaknesses to strengthen their party line and attract others to practice politics.
—————————————
Dhiraj Kumar Nath is a former secretary and adviser to the caretaker government.
Source: UNBConnect
