Return to democracy and the premonitions
There is no dispute as to the imperative of returning to a democratic polity, notwithstanding the increasingly discordant voices of the politicians and the flurry of bails of important corruption suspects. Howsoever difficult and disconcerting it may be to punish the corrupt, we have to remember that punishing the bad hats is an urgent priority because we have to once for all put a stop to the rise of half-educated arrogant predators in the political arena. Surely we do not wish to see the return of the likes of those criminally disposed young members of parliament of Dhaka city and its periphery of the not-too- distant past. These fellows are now behind the bar and the sense of relief consequent upon their absence is there for anyone to see and appreciate.
We must not make the mistake of thinking that those who hunger for political profit or profit in the form of power are less dangerous to society than those who seek monetary profit. It is time to stall the unbridled ambitions of unscrupulous money-makers. Politicians who have very visibly plundered national resources and did not feel uneasy with their ill-gotten wealth need to be exposed and punished. Ministers who have helped and connived at the transfer of prime government land at token price for doubtful use by near relations have to answer for their highhandedness and flouting of rules.
We have to remember that the sense of propriety and the distinction between public property and private gain needs to be restored. If the constraint of legality is not effectively established by ensuring punishment of the corrupt then the crown would always go to the loudest voices, the biggest sticks and the readiest fists. The greatest social purpose is served when wrong is dethroned.
The state needs to disqualify and debar a significant number of suspected politicians from participating in electoral politics in order to ensure the growth of a healthy polity. That goal cannot be achieved if it is not possible to criminally convict a substantial number of politicians before the year is out. The premonition is that once the environment becomes relaxed with the withdrawal of restrictions on political activities, the investigation and enquiry of corruption-related cases and also the trial of such cases would slacken and slow down. The last months of any government's tenure are never an appropriate time to take strong measures.
The state needs to mobilize the best trial lawyers and experienced and capable investigators for successful prosecution. The financial remuneration for such job should be significant and there must not be any bureaucratic encumbrance in this regard.
The premonition is, shall we continue to remain positioned on an ominous fault line, that is, a disconnect between the state and society? Such apprehension assumes significance when one sees the widening gulf between the ruling class and the people and the waning of people's confidence in the establishment.
We would do well in remembering that the crisis of governance at several levels during the supposedly democratic rule was caused not by lack of resources but due to the absence of institutions of governance and the lack of accountability. So when the democrats return to power they will have to decide if in order to promote and protect their interests, they should continue to use coercion, bribery and nepotism and policy and go on nourishing a culture of opportunism, deceit, duplicity and plunder. They need to ponder seriously as to the mechanisms of strengthening the political institutions.
Our democrats should engage in self-introspection to find out how regulatory state outfits have shown progressive decay while only succeeding in suppressing political dissent. They need to understand why in Bangladesh we neither had a democratic setup in the conventional sense nor a state which has the capacity to effectively improve the living standards of the people and arrange security. They have to decide about ensuring political stability and creating space to differing groups.
Our elected representatives of the not-too-distant future will have to compensate for the lack of legitimacy of our weaker democratic system and remove the disconnect between the civil society and the ruling establishment. They must not continue with the misconception that brute force, fear, coercion and corruption are the only sustaining factor of the governing system. Our new dispensation must not seek the support of discredited politicians and individuals having criminal record and not indulge in relaxation of rules for furthering a culture of loot and plunder.
Our potential members of parliament will have to appreciate that they will be dressed in brief authority and that they are not supreme. Therefore, they have to ensure the supremacy of the constitution and thus the eternal human freedoms. In doing so, they will respect the people who have given the constitution unto themselves.
Our political predicament is the result of the inability of our political class to keep pace with the changing times. The main thrust of this class has been towards maintaining the status quo and consequently all our institutions have weakened. Therefore, it is not surprising that three decades after independence we do not see major changes in the mode of governance, all claims and political rhetoric notwithstanding.
We have to admit that our ethno-linguistic and religious homogeneity factor has not succeeded to bring the dynamics of socio-political relations within a manageable limit. Presently, our society is characterized by significant elite-mass gap. A small segment of society influences the decision making, allocation and distribution of resources. The failure of democratic experimentation in the initial years of independence led to a succession of military and quasi-military rule by a coalition of the higher echelon of the military and civil bureaucracy. Political leaders joined later to complete the "coalition of convenience". The first two groups remained dominant.
The elections of 1991, 1996 and 2001 may have restored the supremacy of political leadership but in the meantime immense damage has been caused in our political culture by the combined onslaught of corruption, criminalization and commercialization of politics of the country. The penetration of business interests in politics made possible through a policy of distribution of political patronage and bureaucratic support continued on a wider scale and the emerging business class not only attempted to control politics through donation to party coffer, they displayed a greater readiness to join politics themselves. We now have politicians and parliamentarians who have business interests. This commercialization of politics has become the safest and convenient vehicle of achievements.
Our present ground reality is that while one major political party cries for maintenance of law and order, protection of national interest, the other fights for the democratic rights of people in relentless agitation, work stoppages and violence. Therefore, policies, postures, statements and actions of the political parties and ruling regimes have significant role in conflict aggravation and its transition from one phase to another.
We have to remember that in 1991 there was rising expectations that the virtues of democracy would be appreciated and the potentials of the nation would be rightly tapped in a democratic environment. The new democrats, however, proved to be tougher taskmasters than men in uniform. The bewildered nation witnessed a farcical election in February 1996 after which the government was forced by people's power to abdicate.
From 1996 to 2001 there was a democratic government but dialogue and discussion between politicians of the divide was never a strong point. Instead, the nations had to bear bouts of acrimonious deliberations, both in and out of parliament, bordering on outrageous slander and calumny. Indeed many wondered how Bangla deshis, the proud inheritors of a lofty constitution could be so foul-mouthed in political discourses. Decency and decorum apparently took leave of us.
From 2001 to 2006 there were renewed efforts to politicize all vital state institutions thereby effectively blurring the demarcation between right and wrong and Bangladeshis became the inhabitants of a perilously polarized polity. There were shameless efforts to settle all issues beyond the accepted forum of arbitration and financial propriety was nobody's concern. National resources were for the loot and the opposing political forces were at each others throat.
The danger facing Bangladesh is that it combines economic under-performance with fragile institutions and a constitution which is looked upon by the politicians as so pliant that it can be bent to any whim or caprice of the ruling clan. Added to that is a scenario in which ignorance, incompetence and dishonesty are no disqualifications for high public office, either in the ministerial rank or elsewhere.
The question that agitates many concerned citizens is if our quality of life should continue to suffer by the denial of basic human rights and civil liberties that are an integral part of our fundamental rights as enshrined in the constitution. The deficits of democracy that were so visible in the yesteryears, particularly between 1991-2006 do not create the hope that a quick recovery out of the polluted waters of our public life and the slime and sludge of a corrupted economy would be possible by simply reverting to pre 11 January 2007 situation.
We have not harboured those objectives that push upright men and women to wander beyond the safe provision of personal gratifications. We have not permitted institutions to grow and as a result we witness a political temper that presses partisan advantage to a bitter end. Our political culture has not fostered the habit of understanding and respecting the other side. We have not acclimatized ourselves to the attributes of consent and compromise that are the hallmarks of mature political societies. The spirit of moderations has not prevailed and as such our society has degenerated into divisions and hatred has replaced goodwill.
For our democracy deficits to gradually lessen and disappear, the political parties have to make the crucial choice between absolute power on one hand and the restraints of legality and the authority of tradition on the other. It has to decide on whether to constitute a moral association maintained by duty or a physical one kept together by force. They have to say whether executive action violative of the rule of law has to be tolerated and if the balance between legislature, executive and the judiciary has to be rudely shaken.
Comments