While the Chief Election Commissioner goes around pleading like a school boy to the media (he’s been doing it for months) and even the president recently for lifting the ban on indoor politics, the caretaker government has been burying its head in the sand. After the street violence stemming from DU now it’s anybody’s guess what the government’s next move will be. However, if we are to hold elections by the end of 2008, it is absolutely imperative that the Election Commission hammers out the rules of the game with the politicians and political parties. Elections will be impossible without their active cooperation and participation.
We all know what the government is afraid of in terms of authorizing parties back into the public sphere: a premature and potentially violent movement to restore democracy, hold elections, and free political prisoners right away, aajke, akkhoni. The way this government has been treating political parties (much of it well-deserved, they’ve been destroying our country for too long), it is not unlikely that this won’t happen. But, if the CG thinks that continued political muzzling will somehow magically lead to free elections by 2008 it’s sorely mistaken. The history of democratization worldwide has been tumultuous and violent (I hope to write more about this later). And even with all the muzzling of parties, the country has still ended up with the all too familiar brickbats and teargas scenario in the last few days. Were party activists involved in this? You bet they were. The Chhatra Dal and Chhatra League cadres were certainly not meekly fence sitting during the melee. I am sure the political party activists have relished the government’s embarrassment/panic and may even have actively pushed things along. But the fact is, as far as newspaper reports go, hawkers, rickshawpullers, non-students were also involved. The government has failed the poor and it is now rudderless (as Saif points out). Few can be certain of the CG’s true motivations, but I am going to be optimistic and assume that it wants to hold elections in good faith but is unsure how to proceed without creating the scope for unrest and chaos. Somewhere along the way the CG got carried away and it is now totally lost.
Where does all this leave us?
I humbly recommend the following to-do list for the caretaker government:
1. Immediately ensure that the army does not come to the forefront: We cannot afford to have yet another misguided military takeover and total martial law. God save us from falling into that rut. Look at what’s happened to Musharraf . Why would any one ever want to be a dictator? The fun just doesn’t last! It’s not a stable career track.
2. Win the trust and cooperation of political parties: Perhaps the hardest task, but it needs to start right now, even if behind the scenes. Remember, no goodwill from political parties means no acceptable elections. If we are to have a democracy we can’t live without our political parties (as beastly as they have been). Build a good faith dialogue so that they are convinced that elections will be held by December 2008 and it is in their best interest to wait and refrain from creating mayhem. Try to make them less corrupt, less violent, and reduce their options for taking those nasty short cuts to the throne by focusing on item 4.
3. Publicly renew commitment to democracy and elections: I’m afraid mere words will no longer suffice. Once the dust has settled, lift the ban on indoor politics. Election Commission needs time to negotiate with parties and at least impose some modicum of reform within them. The nomination process and campaign financing are especially important areas to focus on. Continue own dialogue with political parties, don’t just rely on the CEC. Be firm when necessary to keep them in line but remember you’ll be in trouble if you can’t hold elections by 2008 (the recent DU incident should chasten you from pursuing outlandish ideas about ruling for a decade until the deep sea port is completed and we become the next Hong Kong).
4. Keep working to make key institutions independent of political interference: civil service, courts, police, Election Commission, Anti Corruption Commission. It’s not enough to declare institutions independent. Ensure especially that the recruitment, transfer and funding processes in all these institutions are bolstered with checks from political meddling (granted once a new democratically elected government comes to power all of these changes will be reviewed, but they’ll actually have a mandate to do so, and let’s vote for parties that promise to respect the independence of these institutions).
5. Continue prosecuting existing anti corruption cases in the MOST transparent way possible: Maintain complete and total respect for the legal process. This is the only way the outcomes will be acceptable to a majority of Bangladeshis. There will always be some people who will never accept their party leaders serving jail time no matter how well-deserved it is. Convince the rest of us that the politicians in jail really do deserve it. History will judge you much more kindly this way.
6. Pray for the best, buckle up for a bumpy ride, hold elections, leave with dignity and self-respect intact. The election will not be perfect and our parties will not transform themselves overnight. Your greatest achievement will be to block them from returning us to pre January ’07 Bangladesh and move us forward toward a democratic future. It won’t be pretty but it’s better than the alternative.

2 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 24, 2007 at 2:43 pm
Nick
Well said Leela. A good agenda for the caretaker government. I’m an outsider to all this, but it strikes me it might be worthwhile to look to the new Thai Constitution that was written by the military there and just approved by the people (http://www.ect.go.th/english/files/2007-constitution-english%5B1%5D.pdf). In that Constitution they have a very strong place for the judiciary. Several justices, the head of the anti-corruption commission, the head of the election commission appoint members of the Senate. The Senate and king in turn appoints members of the judiciary and the election commission, anti-corruption commission, and ombudsperson. The senate also checks the powers the house which is popularly elected.
I am certainly somewhat skeptical of some of the provisions of the new Constitution (it basically legitimates retroactively the coup by the military and leaves the potential for legitimating future coups depending on how it is read). However, the document is dealing with many of the same issues Bangladesh is and is written by a military that has a history of taking over periodically, but seemingly not wanting to stay in power too long (who wants to govern after all these days . . . ). It might be a helpful place to look for some ideas out of this mess even if one should be somewhat skeptical of the document and the military’s motives in crafting it (for example, it has a list of directive principles the first of which says that the state must provide for the country’s security and basically maintain a healthy defense budget - not that they really needed a provision for that to happen anyway).
The Constitution does develop a few new ways of dispersing power away from the representative branches of government though to try to hold them more accountable. One might think they have gone overboard and this is not democratic at all, but just judicial/royal/military rule in the guise of democracy. That said, it wouldn’t hurt to look at the document. India, where I am, of course, provides another alternative which is to have a super-strong judiciary that can override laws and constitutional amendments while intervening to make laws wherever it sees fit. This though isn’t so much a system as an evolution unique to India which might not be easily transplanted. The idea though - whether in Thailand or India - of using the judiciary and these quasi-autonomous institutions as a check against unruly democracy has been developed to a great deal elsewhere besides Bangladesh (the Taiwan constitution http://www.servat.unibe.ch/law/icl/tw00000_.html also provides an alternative for even more branches of government). It seems it would be useful to look to these different models for a possible a way out of this impasse.
August 31, 2007 at 6:22 am
Leela
Nick, I think you’re onto a nice pattern here. Curbing the power of dysfunctional (or in our case defunct) parliaments by creating powerful independent institutions seems like the only way out in countries of sub-continent and also south-east asia (other than succumbing to outright dictatorship). What this means for the quality of democracy is a deeper question and maybe we’ll let the political theorists worry about it. All I have to say is that Plato et al. would not mind. Think back to Thucydides and the civil war between the democrats and the oligarchs and really the problem is not a new one. Of course a very fine balance will have to be maintained so the democracy doesn’t shift either to a mobocracy or an oligarchy.