Issues of relationships

The two articles in your editorial page on 2nd October, by Md. Nurul Huda and Dr. P.K. Panday, laid emphasis on the relationship between the public representatives and the bureaucrats.
This conflict, in almost all areas of governance, between the elected representatives and the appointed officials, may be identified as the root cause of the failure of parliamentary form of governments in Bangladesh.
In both the articles, the writers believed that undue interferences by the public representatives create the areas of conflict in the administrative process, which is the responsibility of the executive. The sad incident of Pabna and the mode of handling it is an example before us. It seems that we want the government to be run by the public representatives, having full authority, while the executive will implement the representative's direction while bearing full responsibility for governance!
This split of authority and responsibility, can only lead to conflict and confusion, which in a sense is happening now. Our executives, on the other hand would like to operate in the then British India administration model. The upazilla bureaucrats are frustrated, because the Chairman, without any Vice-Chairman or the various sub-committees, tries to exercise all authority, whereas the purse strings are pulled by the UNO! Therein lies the origin of conflicts at upazilla level!
The executive-police interaction should be an executive oriented function, because police is a branch of the executive, to maintain law and order. The responsibility for law and order rests with the executive, and not public representatives, who invariably, when in opposition, tend to disturb law and order. Now the public representatives want to use the police, to function at their whims and wishes, most likely to cripple the opposition as the first priority, under their subjective brand of law and order!