Of significance are the comments of the BNP members, all belonging to the core group of the party, on making the party run on a more democratic line, giving the central committee more say in the conduct of party affairs, and, most importantly, curtailing the power of the party chairperson so as to prevent it being run in an autocratic manner, as has been the case so far, going by the accounts available.

And, of course, their chorus on the influence of "dynasty" in Bangladesh politics is well orchestrated, and touches the common chord of popular sensitivity. (It seems that either the BNP chairperson is totally out of sync with the rest of the country, or had deliberately chosen to thumb her nose at all those calling for more democratisation in the party when she elevated her brother to the post of a senior vice-president, reportedly in violation of the party's constitution.)

It seems that these senior BNP members are trying to outdo each other in their belated, but nonetheless welcome, exercise in self-critique. All very nice and good, but why did they choose to be wise after all these years?

One is not sure whether they have spoken out of conviction, or whether they find it expedient to comment on the lines that they have at this particular time. One would expect "national leaders" (for want of a better description of their position, since very few among them deserve to be called "leader" and even fewer "national") to stand up for their convictions, irrespective of the consequences of taking that position.

It has been the effort of the caretaker government since 1/11 to bring about political reforms, without which the election will be meaningless and the country will, more likely than not, go back to where it was before Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed took charge, if the current modality in nominating and electing the people's representatives remains in place. It is only but natural that a party that does not exercise democratic norms within its own organisation would display an autocratic attitude in administering the country.

Political reforms have several components, the most important of which is the reform within the political parties, of which inner party democratisation is by far the most essential. Reform cannot be externally imposed, or infused. It has to come from within, from the party members themselves.

One positive outcome of the political reform effort of the caretaker government has been that it has compelled the political parties to not only acknowledge the need for reform of the political parties, but also to express their views on the issue publicly, hopefully not merely for public consumption but for action as well.

This is something that has never been on the agenda of the parties, and would never have merited their attention without the caretaker government's insistence on this matter, a matter that is the demand of people too.

One is happy to note that while there are differences of opinion within the BNP as to how the changes should come about, there is a consensus for a qualitative change in the party. One also notices a realisation, from the statements of these leaders, that BNP cannot survive as a major political party should it continue with those at the helm of affairs whose policies and actions have not only spelt doom for the party, but nearly spelt doom for the country too.

In their bout of introspection, these BNP leaders have been admitting, rather ruefully, their mistakes, but for which the political developments might never have come to such a pass. (Admittedly, the BNP is not the only party responsible for the situation we are in. AL must also take its share of the blame for it).

One would like to ask whether the enormity of the mistakes has dawned upon them only lately, or whether their voices of protest were not loud enough to drown those of the "yes men" (and women) and the sycophants.

The litany of BNP's mistakes leads one to question whether, politics being a thinking game, there was any thinking person seeing beyond his or her nose. It seems there was neither a "man" nor a "woman" in the party to get things moving in the right direction, if one were to go by what Lady Thatcher had to say about politics. "In politics, if you want anything said, ask a man; if you want anything done, ask a woman." The right things were not said, and very few, if any, correct things done, by the party.

Even the most politically uninformed could see through the motivation behind enhancing the retirement age of the chief justice. No amount of rationalisation can detract from it the near fatal consequences of the act. And the BNP's intention to influence the election was further confirmed when Justice M. A. Aziz, a sitting judge of the Supreme Court, was made the CEC. (A case is pending in the High Court in this regard).

It should never have allowed President Iajuddin to take over as the chief of the caretaker government, either. It proved disastrous for the country, and at one point it looked as if the future of democracy might be at stake.

Equally appalling was the way the party hounded former president Badrudozza Choudhury, elected to that post by the BNP, out of office, and continued to pester and harass him at every opportunity till he formed his own party. It was a pathetic sight to see the first citizen of the country shabbily treated while those in the party, known to belong to the saner elements in the group, failed to pick up enough nerve to protest.

What one gathers from the recent comments of the senior BNP leaders is that all powers are concentrated in one and one person only. And no one is certain what factors or who inform the decisions before they are made final, what is the process through which decisions are taken.

Apparently, not much cogent thought had gone behind the decisions taken in the past. There is little doubt that the country would have been spared many troubles had the series of mistakes been halted at any one point, and objective and collective rational thought processes been employed to determine policies.

One feels happy that there is change in the mindset, albeit compelled by circumstances, in the senior echelon of the party. It is good to hear that they would like to see the autocratic manner of running political parties done away with. It is sad, though, that they chose to be wise so late in the day. But then it is better to be late than never.

The author is Editor Defence & Strategic Affairs, The Daily Star.