Serving a party is against the oath of BPSC

Finding a member of a constitutional body in a sub-committee of the ruling party may not seem something innocuous. But naming Prof Delwar Hossain, who is a member of the Bangladesh Public Service Commission (BPSC), as a member of Bangladesh Awami League's international affairs sub-committee has stoked quite a controversy. According to the media, AL General Secretary Obaidul Quader approved the 56-member sub-committee for 2022-25 on July 24.

It is the second instance in less than two and a half years in which a constitutional office holder has been included in the ruling party's organisational structure. Previously, the Awami League included Attorney General AM Amin Uddin in its sub-committee on information and research affairs on February 18, 2021. But the party dropped the attorney general from the sub-committee merely a few days later amid criticism, which is why Prof Delwar Hossain's appointment as a party functionary is quite puzzling. Does it mean that the ruling party no longer thinks that keeping constitutional offices free from its clutches is necessary?

In a way, Delwar Hossain's constitutional position is more restrictive than that of the attorney general, though the latter's office appears higher in order in the constitution. The constitution doesn't impose any bar on the person holding the office of the attorney general from being eligible for future appointments in services of the republic.

But as far as the office of the members of the BPSC is concerned, the constitution unambiguously debars the person from any such service. Article 139(4) stipulates: On ceasing to hold office, a member of a public service commission shall not be eligible for further employment in the service of the Republic, but, subject to the provisions of Clause (1), (a) a chairman so ceasing shall be eligible for re-appointment for one further term; and (b) a member (other than the chairman) so ceasing shall be eligible for re-appointment for one further term as chairman of a public service commission.

This specific and stricter disqualification for any future service of the republic can have only one purpose, which is to ensure one's neutrality and restraint from responding to any kind of enticement. In this case, at least, the framers of our constitution did realise the gravity of the question of conflict of interest. It has also been reflected in the prescribed oath of office for the members of BPSC in the third schedule of the constitution. The last line in the sacred oath says, "And that I will not allow my personal interest to influence my official conduct or my official decisions." Arguably, belonging to a party forum brings in some degree of political commitment to the party, which is bound to influence someone's judgement.

People with multiple commitments and working for the better future of the country and society do need appreciation and encouragement. But there are quite a few offices in which the holder has to confine themselves within their remit and sacrifice many other things, including not-for-profit work. That's why we see Supreme Court judges or election commissioners disassociate themselves from non-government organisations, be it research-oriented or charity.

Delwar, a former chairman of the Department of International Relations at Dhaka University, told the media that he did not apply for the party position, but was made one of the expert members of the committee anyway. However, AL International Affairs Secretary Shammi Ahmed told a local daily that Delwar had been informed of his inclusion and gave his consent. If the professor is to be believed, then the Awami League stands accused of forming an expert committee by not only ignoring the constitution, but also imposing a responsibility upon someone without even checking whether he is willing or not. No one is doubting Delwar's scholarly abilities and contribution to the country's foreign policy area, but it is hard to believe that the ruling party, which could find 55 other willing experts, would have been crippled without him.

Prof Delwar Ahmed has been well-known in the academic circle and beyond as an ardent supporter of the Awami League, and understandably it was one of the prerequisites of a political government to consider appointing him to a very important constitutional position. This practice of political appointments has been going on for successive governments, but has now reached an unprecedented level, which has led to a widely held perception that all state institutions have been fully captured by the party in power. Delwar's failure to recuse himself from the activities of Awami League gives further credence to such a perception.

People with multiple commitments and working for the better future of the country and society do need appreciation and encouragement. But there are quite a few offices in which the holder has to confine themselves within their remit and sacrifice many other things, including not-for-profit work. That's why we see Supreme Court judges or election commissioners disassociate themselves from non-government organisations, be it research-oriented or charity.

The BPSC members, too, get and enjoy equal status, job protection and privileges for a purpose, which is to make them neutral and independent both in essence and appearance. If writing newspaper columns, appearing on talk shows and chairing a think tank remain someone's preference, then wouldn't it have been better for them to not take the responsibility of a constitutional office? How can serving a particular party's interest be termed as not against the oath of office of the BPSC?

Kamal Ahmed is an independent journalist. His Twitter handle is @ahmedka1