Returning to CG is essential

General elections have never been free and fair except under "consensus" (in 1991) or "constitutional" (1996, 2001) caretaker government (CG) in Bangladesh. On the other hand, each and every general election held during CG period has been free and fair, although the losing party raised unfounded allegations of rigging; every time it had to comply with the people's mandate.
After the brutal murder of President Mujibur Rahman along with most of his family members, and jail killing of the most capable leaders, a political vacuum was created. The country was under military and quasi-military regimes for about a decade and a half, and the elections under these regimes were below the acceptance level. A type of "democracy" was reestablished in early 1991through the first CG (of "consensus").
However, on forming the government, BNP leaders forgot the national consensus on the need of a caretaker government (CG) and rigged some by-elections. The then opposition Awami League, having support from many parties including the Jamaat-e-Islami, led an all-out movement for making the CG provision constitutional. The alliance was victorious in getting the provision passed by the shortest-lived parliament in early 1996.
The people realised the importance of AL-Jamaat's "discovery" of politicians' inability to help hold a fair election and their "invention" of the CG system to ensure free and fair general elections. The people rewarded AL in 1996 election with victory. Should the AL high command forget this truth and kill the CG that was the AL's baby?
Now, the AL chief and the incumbent Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina points her fingers to the two-year long unusual interim government of 2007-2008 and the Supreme Court (SC) verdict (that is yet to be published in full) against the CG provision. But she forgets that the unusual interim government, though structurally similar to the constitutional CG, was not a true CG but was an ultravires interim government of "need." The "need" was felt because the BNP-Jamaat alliance manipulated the CG system to their advantage. The constitutional CG of October 2006 was ill-formed and was made totally non-functional on resignation of some advisers. It should also be noted that the needful interim government actually "rescued" the falling statecraft and, apart from its staying for long two years and attempting some unrealistic steps like the "minus two" formula, people at large would still appreciate that government's governance, which our "democratic" leaders often fail to provide. Yet the people want to practice their voting rights properly to have democratic governments.
Even the incompletely published SC verdict has ruling for holding two more general elections under CG that the learned SC judges thought necessary. We all understand that the very concept of unelected CG goes against the spirit of democracy. Even when the AL led a movement for CG in 1990s, it was not in line with the democratic principles but was felt essential. The CG system could be essential until our politicians attain maturity in practicing democratic norms fully. Before that, showing that some local elections went against the government party will not create the belief in the people's mind that general elections will also be free and fair under a party government.
The AL government's mismanagement of the economy, especially of the share market, and uncontrolled behaviour of some party men and especially of its student wing, have already contributed to a substantial decrease in popularity as revealed by some opinion survey conducted recently. Whatever the AL high command gives as reasons behind cancelling of CG and in support of conducting general elections under its own custody, people don't have trust in a partisan interim government, and they interpret such logic as plots to stay in power for long.
People are worried that a party government transformed into an interim one may resort to rigging in the general election. In addition, the opposition is up and doing for reinstating of the CG provision, and have said they will not participate in the next general elections under a partisan interim system. It is claimed by some that the major opposition now also supports a system of interim government, instead of CG, if that is formed by leaders from both the government and the opposition.
Since the majority of the people don't believe in the sincerity of any party government in conducting a fair general election, and a combined interim government would also fail, the government party must return to the essential CG system. This may happen even after forming a government on winning a farcical election, as was held in early 1996. The delay in taking steps for returning to CG is causing sufferings to the people from hartals, demonstrations etc., and is just pushing more and more people to the opposition camp.
It's high time that the AL high command realises this truth. In essence, CG is not only still possible but also essential for democracy in Bangladesh. The need is to close the loopholes in the 13th Amendment that was inserted in 1996 for creating the CG system.

The writer is a specialist on social issues.
Email: [email protected].