Pushing the country towards a crisis?

JUDGED by sudden and frequent change in the attitude and the stance adopted by the two major political parties vis-à-vis election scheduled to be held in December, it is really difficult to say that we are well on the road to a reasonably participatory election.
While it did raise our hope and optimism to see that as many as 107 political parties including AL and BNP-JI alliance applied dutifully for the first time for registration with the EC as per the amended RPO, immediately there was a pall of gloom over the political horizon when we heard that neither AL nor BNP and its allies would take part in the election unless their demands are met.
AL insisted on its "Jono Netri" (People's Leader) Sheikh Hasina being freed from all charges of corruption brought against her, and on lifting of emergency from the country as preconditions for taking part in the election. AL also made it clear that the party would not take part in the election without Sheikh Hasina.
The positive thing about AL is that the party has no serious objections to the amended RPO, which essentially seeks to democratise the political parties and enforce compliance with the relevant constitutional provision on our war of independence and ban on religion-based politics.
BNP-JI alliance on the other hand demanded scrapping of the amended RPO, reversion back to the old RPO, withdrawal of all corruption cases against the alliance leaders, and lifting of emergency as preconditions for taking part in the December election. BNP also threatened to boycott election without its "Desh Netri" (Leader of the Country) Begum Khaleda Zia.
While there are misgivings in the mind of the people that this caretaker government, having already softened its stand on corruption, may well be more accommodative and conciliatory in its efforts to ensure that the major political parties participate in the election, it would be wise on the part of the government to take a principled stand on these demands.
The amended RPO is definitely an improved version of the old RPO insofar as democratisation and democratic culture of the political parties are concerned. Jamaat's opposition to the amended RPO is understandable because its constitution and its declared shibboleth clearly militate against fundamental provisions of our constitution in that while Jamaat refused to recognise the glorious war of our liberation, the constitution of our country upholds it. It is the amended RPO which forced Jamaat to recognise our war of liberation after 37 years of independence. It had to swallow a bitter pill just to remain in the mainstream national politics.
Scrapping of the amended RPO, if allowed, will mean doing away with the need for a political party being registered with the EC before it can take part in any election. It will also mean that the draft amended party constitutions already submitted to the EC by various political parties for registration will be of no consequence. Should the government decide to scrap the amended RPO or strip it of provisions objected to by BNP-JI alliance, it will do so at the cost of its avowed policy to introduce genuine democracy and secular politics in the country.
It is preposterous to think that the government which must work relentlessly to uphold the rule of law and the cause of truth and justice would agree to withdraw cases of corruption against high profile political leaders already indicted on massive corruption and wrong doings just to facilitate participation of one or two political parties in the election. Whether or not the politicians indicted on corruption and wrong doings will be eligible to take part in the coming December election ought to be left to the judiciary to decide.
What however is negotiable is the decision to continue with the state of emergency or otherwise during the election. But here again it needs to be emphasised that lifting of emergency may open the flood gates of all proceedings of corruption cases being challenged in courts and finally quashed. Besides in the absence of emergency the armed cadres of various political parties which have been lying low so long would surface again and resort to brow beating the voters not sympathetic to their own party candidates. This is a possibility or eventuality which can hardly be discounted.
It will take lot of guts and wisdom and good will on the part of the major political parties to agree to disagree that complete withdrawal of emergency is not in the interest of holding a free, fair and genuinely credible election. Given good will on the part of the government and the participating political parties, a credible election can take place even when the country remains under a state of emergency. Let us not forget that when the 1970 general election was held in the then Pakistan, the country was under martial law, and it was by far the most credible election ever held in that country.
What the government can do and must do is to relax relevant emergency rules to the extent that political leaders and activists of political parties can move about freely across the country, hold political rallies and projection meetings, and do door to door campaigning in support of their party candidates.
On October 22 the government sent five of its advisers, led by Mr. Hossain Zillur Rahman, to talk to Begum Khaleda Zia at her cantonment house, possibly on the BNP-JI demands, and explain the government stand. It is encouraging to hear that the second round of talks held between the government and the two major political parties the following day went off well. Both AL and BNP seemed to be happy with the outcome. Advisor Hossain Zillur Rahman said after the talks that the government had differences only on the issue of holding upazilla election. This is good news. But we do not know who prevailed upon whom. We do not know if wisdom and good sense have prevailed in the long run.

Brig. Gen. Shamsuddin Ahmed (retd) is a Freedom Fighter and former Military Secretary to the President.