Caretaker government

That is what one has to deduce from the two articles that he has recently written in your newspaper. Mr. Kibria does want a caretaker government, although there is no such thing in the world in a democracy. But he seems to want it tailored in a manner that suits the Awami League alone and sort of guarantees its perpetual victory in the polls.

This is evident from his latest reply to Justice Latifur Rahman for the latter's rejoinder to him. Kibria says, "On the question of selection of advisers, I did not say that the method followed by him was illegal. In my view he acted within the letter of the law but he violated the spirit of the law."

Kibria has not explained what the so-called "spirit of the law" is. If it means that the two main political parties will strike a deal behind the scene to cobble together a caretaker government that will put up a deceptive face of neutrality, he is simply trying to bamboozle people. If this is what he understands by neutrality, I have nothing to say.

I think Mr. Kibria contradicts his own argument when he says, "The caretaker concept is based on the need to create confidence in the minds of the government and the opposition." How can he create confidence with such behind-the-scene arrangement? However, with apologies to him, the caretaker concept was designed to create an interim government made up of absolutely neutral people not of the people nominated by the two main parties for the purpose of a free election.

Mr. Kibria indirectly admits that his hatred towards the last caretaker government was due to the fact that the Awami League lost the election. "There must have been individuals in the Council who were upright and neutral, but the record of the Council as a whole is very poor. It failed to inspire confidence in the opposition," he says. Mr. Kibria does have the right to hold such a highly prejudiced opinion, because this is his personal matter. On a national plane, he has no right to pronounce judgement on anybody else's behalf. Who should decide whether the record of the Council was poor or not?

Little did he realise that, in his zest, he has ruthlessly undermined the 10 parties that have now banded together with the Awami League for a campaign to overthrow the present government. That he doesn't count the other parties at all is evidenced by the following: "I was amused to note that Justice Latifur Rahman does not know which "two sides" I was referring to. I was simply referring to the ruling party and the principal opposition party in the parliament. Let him analyse the voting pattern in the election and he will realise what I mean by "two sides".

So, the cat is almost out of the bag. He only recognises the "two sides", not the other parties because the voting pattern in the last election gets them nowhere. It's time for other parties to see if they are not wasting their time with the Awami League.