JS committees
The government is finally doing something to form the parliamentary standing committees. It has drafted the lists of 41 committees, and is planning to push the scheme through in the forthcoming session of the Jatiya Sangsad.
However, the decision is a unilateral one. Little progress was made after the opposition demanded that it be given such a number of berths as chairmen of committees as will be proportionate to their number of seats in parliament. But the majority of the ruling party lawmakers are convinced that they should not bother about such a demand, as the immediate past government did not respond to a similar request from the then opposition BNP, which had 113 seats in the parliament.
The formation of parliamentary committees has been in abeyance for nearly one year and a quarter of the parliament's tenure and this cannot brook any further delay. The standing committees have a very important role to play in ensuring transparency and accountability of the government through an active role of the opposition in them. These committees are also meant for giving depth and dimension to the functioning of the parliament.
When the previous government decided that even the MPs, who were not ministers, could become chairman of a standing committee, it was actually making a constructive move. But its failure to give opposition lawmakers a single post of chairman reflected a poor understanding of the parliamentary system.
We have come to learn that a section of the ruling party MPs are willing to concede some ground to the opposition by giving them a few posts of chairman. Of course, such concessions have to be made if they want the opposition to play an active role, and they better be made in respect of oversight committees such as public accounts committee, public undertakings committee, et all.
Valuable time has already been lost, and when the parliament okays the committees, leaving the posts of the opposition nominees vacant, it would really give the whole show the look of a 'perfunctory fulfilment of a duty.' The government has not given the opposition space outside the parliament. As for the parliamentary committees they should go the extra-mile to accommodate some of the opposition demands.
Mere formation of the standing committees cannot, of course, be the ultimate goal. The committees will have to have well-defined jobs to perform. But the way things have shaped up so far does little to convince those who need to be that they will be effective. And that is a harsh truth that neither side can ignore, and the ruling party needs to be particularly aware of the pitfall -- an insipid and lackadaisical performance on the part of the committees fully dominated by the ruling party lawmakers cannot provide sinews to democracy.
Comments