National integrity strategy and institutional decay
Newspaper reports have it that the present Caretaker Government is contemplating to formulate a national integrity strategy that are required to be maintained at different institutions of state organs. Reportedly, experts involved in this venture are already in the process of identifying problems or challenges in the state and non-state institutions, defining goals and devising strategies to achieve those. Such experts have expressed cautious optimism by commenting that the implementation of the said national integrity strategy would depend entirely on the political will of the future governments.
Discerning observers get an impression that the present government is entertaining doubts about the sustainability of its positive reforms and house-cleaning and the efforts to fix the criminal liability of the powerful groups. Such apprehensions cannot be ruled out in Bangladesh where there are deliberate efforts to give political colour to every establishment initiative that harms one political party or another. In addition, there is no denying that politics has become tainted in our polity.
The important question in such a scenario is that how would our politicians ensure business with integrity when many of them including a sizable number at the top stand accused of disturbing malfeasance and misfeasance? How they would invigorate and rejuvenate institutions for whose decadence they are responsible in a large manner?
If we retrace our steps we will find that in the formative years of independent Bangladesh, the prominent political leaders had displayed high degree of distrust for the bureaucracy. That distrust influenced the new leaders to vitiate standing convention of political non-interference in recruitment and routine civil service management. The intention was to achieve dominance over bureaucracy in a changed socio-political environment. The government, however, constituted the Administrative and Services Reorganization Committee. This committee showed the way for the reform but their recommendation for reorganization remained in cold storage. This, therefore, indicated that the political leadership was not interested in a well organized administrative system. The bureaucracy itself was partially responsible for resisting reforms.
Political expediencies have dominated the decision-making process in respect of recruitment to the civil service and subordinate ranks of police organization. The quota system in recruitment to various services and posts has adversely affected the competitive ability of many well qualified candidates. Successive political governments have refrained from effective changes in the quota system for fear of losing popularity. The priority of merit over so-called equitable principles does not merit discussion in the policy parlance.
The politicians exploited the different interest groups who were ready to be abused and misused and had amongst their ranks some of the most shamefully pliable officials. These officials in the civil and non-civil bureaucracy had the dubious distinction of being the forerunner of media coup and election engineering. Quite a few of our academically brilliant bureaucrats became the henchmen of the vilest dictator. The political polarization of the services started in the eighties. The 1973 appointees were suspected to be aligned to the Awami League while the lateral appointees were considered faithfuls for the BNP.
The 'Janatar Mancha' of 1996 and the general election of 2001 brought into sharp focus the ugly fangs of polarization in the service. Scores of officers were retired on alleged political allegiance to a particular political party while the faithfuls or partisans were given prize postings and accelerated promotions. The divisiveness became all too prominent and manifest.
In respect of institutional decay one may refer to the behaviour pattern of our political class. While politicians have been desperate in securing governmental power by continuously harping on the urgency of people's empowerment, in reality issues of freedom and emancipation have waited for a painfully long time. The incongruity of having a ministry of local self-government did not evoke much remedial measures until recently. The emasculated local bodies do not bother the thinkers and potential leaders. All these go on while one has to bear with the platitudes of overbearing political leaders.
The tragic fallout of the above scenario is that despite having a resilient population we do not have enough energetic and dedicated people who combine the willingness to assume responsibility for building a new realm of freedom with the practical arts necessary to solve the problems that stand in the way of its realization.
In effect, we have nurtured an authoritarian structure that has specifically repudiated the idea of popular sovereignty. The politicians of all descriptions and bureaucrats of dubious credentials in their power-obsessed career have denied to our citizens real opportunity to grow in self-reliance and responsibility. The development of a truly democratic consciousness has been impeded by the weight of our establishment.
In the not-too-distant past the nation found itself in a deplorable political scenario because constitutional bodies betrayed the trust reposed in them. This was so because partisanship was painfully dominant in the affairs of the State and comprehensive politicization was deemed as pragmatic strategy. The day is not far when we will find it difficult to wax eloquent on the novelty of our constitutionally incorporated caretaker dispensation because in 2006 its image was badly bruised by silly pronouncements, legally and morally indefensible acts and stultifying actions.
While our political masters and all concerned would time and again emphasize upon the importance of people's unity for real emancipation, the unfortunate reality in Bangladesh, as of now, is that on almost every aspect of national life, the people are being ominously divided into two hostile groups. We may have been admirably vocal in our clamour for democracy but in reality it has been kept limited to the holding of election, convening the parliament and formation of council of ministers only.
Democratic government did not ensure the honour of citizens. The unfortunate reality of the recent past was that, to lead a peaceful life one had to be a partisan. To retain one's proprietary right over land, secure contract for development work or to even safely build a house on one's own property, one needed the support of local powerful group enjoying the patronage of political power.
Post-election vengeance shamed everybody. Whether or not elections were conducted freely and in a fair manner, the plight of the political workers of defeated party and their fugitive existence made heart-rending stories. Their misery was further compounded by the institution of politically motivated criminal cases that aimed at crippling the opponents socially and psychologically.
While politics was supposed to be an edifying pursuit, in reality political identity for many became a hazard. This was so because politics in many places turned into a sinister business where annihilation of the adversary became the preferred option. There was a desperate bid to amass money being totally oblivious of the legality of such acquisition. For politicians ill-gotten money was considered insurance for rainy days.
Politics did not bring people together. Most public leaders did not socialize amongst themselves, did not enquire about each other's welfare and some were not even on talking terms. They did not appear socially responsible and created unhealthy precedents. The resultant acrimonious environment did not augur well for the nation, as the society became one dimensional where only unquestioned obedience to the establishment was rewarded and dissent became a liability if not a constant discomfort.
The arrogance and intolerance of our public leaders on issues of national importance have disappointed our friends from abroad. Many visitors have wondered how Bangladeshis who have crafted such an admirably lofty constitution could be so foul-mouthed in political discourses and behave so immaturely on the social circuit. One was at a loss to see criminal liabilities of a particular time being condoned at another time without the benefit of legal scrutiny.
The question that should bother a discerning mind is whether with our fragile institutions and economic under-performance we can have a truly representational democracy. There is no denying that the whim and caprice of our ruling clan of the immediate past have transformed our democracy into a confrontational and dysfunctional entity. The burly sinners of our political world have consistently corrupted goodness.
The commendable reform venture of the present government has brought to the fore the large scale deviations and malfunctioning that have taken place in our body-politic. Irregularities and waywardness have been so deep and corrosive that unless sustained efforts are made to restore normalcy and propriety, in at least the domain of public affairs, it may not be possible to ensure decent living in a civilized society.
Paramount importance needs to be attached to the repair and rebuilding of vital institutions that nourish and nurture a democratic society. Collapse will overtake our country if our institutions, particularly the political ones do not acquire durability through experience and tradition.
Successful democratic experience indicates that we cannot be truly free without doing away with ignorance. We have to realize that our leaders have to rebuild and also produce the required institutions for doing the needful. In course of time, those institutions will produce the leaders.
One would not be far from reality to say that in Bangladesh we have devalued the judiciary, as we have devalued every other important institution. Instead of defending our judges against political pressures and threats and instead of insisting upon integrity and impartiality in judicial appointments we have permitted the executive to supersede judges of caliber and courage.
The politicians and the media complain that higher judicial appointments have been given to persons who are suspected to subscribe to the notions of the ruling party. Therefore, it would be prudent to recognize the underlying moral, political and constitutional implications of such gross indiscretions. It is perhaps time to initiate corrective measures to effectively halt the irregularities and hold aloft the majesty of judiciary in public interest.
In fact, the present government has already effected key personnel changes in sensitive regulatory institutions. The staffing pattern, entry qualifications, domain of responsibilities and related matters in constitutional posts require scrutiny before formalization.
What, however, should engage our thoughts in the wake of the present efforts of transformation, is the nearly all pervasive attitude of tentativeness in every establishment effort to innovate or contain or arrest systemic deficiencies. Without doubt, such tentativeness has an adverse impact on the staying power of democracy.
The cynics say that we in Bangladesh do not appreciate that freedom must be taken in moderation and that our misplaced enthusiasm following independence resulted in the unfortunate discarding of the old norms of discipline and decorum, dignity and decency. We are oblivious of the fact that people have risen to great heights when they have basked in the glow of noble kings or leaders. In fact, regimes have been destroyed not by adversity but by abasement.
We have to hope and pray that institution building in Bangladesh, now, would mean that there will be a change from privilege to talent and from accident of birth to accent on calibre. It shall also mean that money is something to be earned rather than to be got or won; it shall mean putting extra effort before extra leisure; it will mean stopping our society from disintegrating into hostile factions; it will mean enabling our leaders to perceive the truth and empowering them with the courage to say it to the people; it shall ensure that there is no substitute for knowledge and integrity in public life and that persons are appointed to high public offices for what they are.
The ensuing election could be made the matrix of a regenerated nation. More important would be to establish Government of Bangladesh limited -- limited not in responsibility but limited by the rule of law and the discipline of the constitution. No government should treat the constitution as its private property and our laws as its personal backyard.
Comments