Testing time for president
It will be a true test for President Abdul Hamid whether he would be able to do something extraordinary now to break the political deadlock over the general election. If he rises to the occasion, his move can build up the hope for a solution to the crisis through discussion between the ruling and opposition camps.
BNP chief Khaleda Zia in a clever strategy has put the ball in his court by requesting him yesterday to take steps to resolve the political impasse. All eyes now will focus on the Bangabhaban to know whether his office could make any effective move.
The president is the titular head of the state in parliamentary form of government. He performs all his duties on the advice of the prime minister, except for the appointments of the chief justice and prime minister.
But his office can play an important role in an extraordinary situation. President Abdul Hamid himself may advise Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to take steps to resolve the crisis. He has significant powers to draw the attention of the government to any crucial national issue. Article 48 (5) of the constitution gives him the power. It says, “The Prime Minister shall keep the President informed on matters of domestic and foreign policy, and submit for the consideration of the Cabinet any matter which the President may request him to refer to it.”
Analysing this particular power of the president, former attorney general Mahmudul Islam in his book Constitutional Law of Bangladesh writes: “On paper, this may not appear to be a power at all, but it has considerable importance. A man of high stature, integrity and experience holding the office of the President can exert great influence on the executive government by way of advice and counselling and play a great role in building a bridge between the government and the opposition.”
When Abdul Hamid assumed presidency around seven months ago, the then prevailing signs in the political arena had suggested that he might have to take steps to save the country from plunging into political anarchy.
Now the time has come. His efforts will determine whether he is able to make any difference or will act according to prime minister’s advice.
His two predecessors Abdur Rahman Biswas and Iajuddin Ahmed had held talks with political parties to break political stalemate in 1996 and 2006.
In the face of a sustained non-cooperation movement for introduction of the caretaker government system, then prime minister Khaleda Zia had moved to hold talks with the agitating opposition parties, including the Awami League. But the opposition refused to sit with the government. They demanded the president hold the talks. Advised by the then PM, former president Biswas had opened talks with the political parties.
Iajuddin had initiated talks at the end of October, 2006 after the secretary general-level talks between the then ruling BNP and main opposition AL failed to reach any consensus on the appointment of the chief adviser of the caretaker government and reconstitution of the then Election Commission.
But both Biswas and Iajuddin had failed as they could not exert their influence on the rival parties; rather the two had reportedly followed the line of the party (BNP) that had nominated them for presidency.
Iajuddin even did the most ridiculous thing. In addition to his presidency, he suddenly assumed the office of the chief adviser of the caretaker government on advice of the BNP. His performance as the chief adviser was mired in controversy as he reportedly acted on advice of the BNP. The result was a political disaster: declaration of the state of emergency in January, 2007.
Iajuddin’s successor late Zillur Rahman, on advice of the incumbent prime minister, had opened talks with political parties in December 2011 to reach a consensus among the parties over the formation of a new EC.
His efforts had brought no results as the BNP-led opposition parties did not show any interest in formation of the EC. Rather, they requested Zillur Rahman to take steps for reinstating the caretaker government system, which was abolished by parliament in June 2011.
In response, Zillur repeatedly informed the opposition leaders about his “inability” to do so and cited limitations of his “constitutional powers.”
But the present political crisis demands efforts from his successor Abdul Hamid to end the political standoff. This time around, the situation seems more complicated than it was in the past.
Comments