Politics of CG: Hasina now and then

PRIME Minister Sheikh Hasina has become protector of the constitution after rejecting BNP's demand for reintroduction of a non-partisan election time government. The reason is clear -- the present constitution allows her and her cabinet to remain in office during the next parliamentary polls as her government has ensured it by hurriedly abolishing the caretaker government system through amending the constitution in June 2011.

Since then, she and her colleagues in the cabinet and the AL have been trashing the BNP's demand, saying that the constitution does not allow unelected people in the form of a caretaker government to run the country for even a moment and the next elections will be held under the elected government.

But when Awami League under her leadership had waged vigorous street agitations 18 years ago for introduction of the caretaker government system she and her party colleagues did not pay heed to the then constitutional provision, which also did not allow unelected people in the form of a caretaker government to rule the country.

The violent street agitations including blockade, non-cooperation movement and around 100 days countrywide hartal forced the then BNP-led government to introduce the caretaker government system in 1996 by amending the constitution to allow unelected people to run the country during the election period.

Alongside the street agitations during 1994-96, Hasina and her party had also presented some models for the caretaker government.

They had proposed making the sitting chief justice or any other sitting judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court head of the caretaker government. In a bill submitted to the Parliament Secretariat on October 28, 1993, the AL proposed amendment of Article 56 (4) of the Constitution and called for formation of an interim caretaker government headed by the sitting chief justice.

Besides his own duties, the chief justice would perform the additional duty as the head of the caretaker government and would return to his original post after the election. The president would appoint a council of advisers whose members would not take part in the polls, said the AL's bill.

The AL chief reiterated the proposal during mediation between the AL and the BNP-led government by a group of five eminent citizens about resolving the political standoff over the demand for introduction of the caretaker government.

The proposal for making the chief justice or a judge of the Appellate Division was also contrary to the then constitutional provision as none of them are elected by the people. Moreover, it was also unconstitutional as the constitution in no way allows the sitting chief justice or any other judge of the Appellate Division to hold another constitutional office.

On request of all political parties after fall of autocratic ruler H.M. Ershad in December 1990, then Chief Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed assumed the office of the vice-president and acted as the president during the fifth parliamentary polls held in February 1991.

Later, the parliament formed through the elections amended the constitution, ratifying and validating resumption of the post of vice president by Justice Shahabuddin, his return to the office of chief justice, and all actions taken by his interim government.

The AL had also rejected a formula given in 1994 by Sir Ninian Stephen, a special envoy from the then Commonwealth secretary general, on formation of a makeshift government with elected people under the provision of the then constitution.

According to his formula, an 11-member makeshift cabinet would be formed with the then incumbent prime minister in the chair. Five cabinet members would be from the ruling and five others from the opposition parties. The interim cabinet would give all-out support to the Election Commission for holding free and fair parliamentary polls.

To gear up street agitations to mount pressure on the then BNP-led government, the AL and other opposition parties including Jatiya Party and Jamaat-e-Islami also boycotted the parliament for a long time, giving birth to a culture of House boycott. They boycotted 135 of 400 sittings of the Fifth Parliament, despite taking oath not to allow personal interests to influence the discharge of duties.

Their House boycott was declared illegal and unconstitutional by the High Court. In a verdict delivered on December 11, 1994, the High Court strongly denounced the continuous parliament boycott by the then opposition parties -- AL, Jatiya Party and Jamaat.

"They are not only coercing the ruling party members to concede their demands [introduction of the caretaker government system by amending the constitution] but also about to bring a downfall of the democratically elected government for their selfish end," said the verdict whose effectiveness was stayed by the Appellate Division next day.

The Court also asked the opposition MPs to return to parliament. But the opposition MPs belonging to AL, Jatiya Party and Jamaat-e-Islami refrained from returning to the House, paying no heed to the court's verdict. Rather, they resigned en mass from parliament on December 28, 1994, to take their agitation to the peak to realise their demand.

The AL also did not care about its constitutional duties as the main opposition in parliament during the past BNP-led government during 2001-2006 and continued the House boycott to meet its various demands, including the one for electoral reforms. In the five year tenure of the eighth parliament AL MPs boycotted 223 out of 373 sittings.

This time, when it is in power, AL did not pay heed to the Supreme Court verdict to abolish the caretaker government in June 2011. Even before the Supreme Court released the copy of its full verdict, the AL-led government with support of its two-third majority abolished the caretaker government system and amended the constitution. In so doing, the government did not even consider the other part of the court's verdict that spoke for keeping the caretaker government system to hold two more parliamentary polls for the sake of security of the state and people.

The 15th Amendment, which dissolved the caretaker government system, also includes some controversial things like making provision for allowing MPs to remain in office during the polls and making more than 51 articles of the constitution unamendable.

Given the situation, isn't it clear that Sheikh Hasina defends the constitution strongly only when it serves her party's purpose?

The writer is Senior Reporter, The Daily Star.