In quest of a credible election
A series of actions taken by the ruling alliance from the very beginning of its assuming power have led people to discern the hallmark of a blue print that would eventually ensure its re-election, not through winning heart of the voters but through some cunning and surreptitious maneuverings. Immediately after the election of 2001, it may be recalled, a vendetta was let loose in the AL strongholds, particularly targeting the weaker community. Secondly, raising of retirement age for SC judges which fits into the calculus that the next CTG chief would be a BNP-beneficiary raised eyebrows of many. Thirdly, politicisation of Civil Administration and the judiciary was done in an obnoxious way. Shuffling in field administration surpassed all previous records. Through trial and error methods, several sets of officials have been lined up so that if one set is to be withdrawn on partisan charges there would be second and third lines of dependable persons available to man the posts. How many changes the CTG can make? The grand finesse of politicisation would pay dividend in one way or the other.
In recent seminars on fair election there were talks of replacing DC/TNO by District Election Officers or members of judiciary as returning officers. Being alarmed at this, the ruling party quietly inducted nearly 100 EOs, mostly drawn from the members of its students wing, the JCD. So if EOs are really given wider responsibility and power in future to conduct the upcoming election then these stalwarts of BNP will secure posts at the ground level during election. As if it was not enough, the back up process was further fortified. Nearly a thousand police officers and intelligence men have been recruited through a controversial selection process. Their statutory training period has been shortened to enable their placement in police administration well ahead of election. Similarly, appointment of 200 magistrates is reportedly on the card. Under whichever administration the upcoming election is conducted, those thousand plus partisan police officers and other inductees will stay around the election booths playing decisive role during campaign and electioneering days besides already existing loyal guards in guise of government functionaries.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. Past experiences suggest that the pattern of deployment of troops (police, special forces and military), polling officials and magistrates in days ahead of election do influence the voter turn out, voting pattern and result on the polling day. Politicisation of administration is being conducted in such a naked way that country's top civil servant, the sitting Cabinet Secretary, sitting judges and holders of statutory posts in Public Service Commission are now seen openly engaged in political campaign in their would-be constituencies using government outfits at their command. This has on the one hand demoralised the upright, non-political government officials while on the other hand further deepened the growing fear that no fair or credible election will be possible unless the CTG system and the EC are subjected to a thorough overhauling.
Euphoric optimism was echoed in days following the Chittagong Mayoral election. It was argued that if people were vigilant their verdict could not be snatched away by administrative manipulation or conspiracy. But in terms of reality this is a naive and too simplistic an approach. There is no scope for complacency. Remember the extent of vigilance exerted at each polling centre of Chittagong city and how the Election Commission headquarters at Dhaka was guarded by the opposition stalwarts on the day of election. It was an election involving Chittagong city only. Can such full proof vigilance be enforced when election in all 300 seats will be held on a single day at several thousand polling centres spread all over the country? It is an impossible proposition unless a staggered polling system is introduced.
The appointment of Justice MA Aziz as CEC and his erratic activities aggravated an already volatile political situation. Induction of two extra ECs with no known credible past at this stage has raised more questions rather than answering one. The PM in her last winding speech in the Parliament accused AL of appointing a "controversial CEC" without consulting them, then in the opposition (Daily Sangbad, March 1, 2006). Law Minister Moudud Ahmed also said, "No government has so far appointed Chief Election Commissioner or Election Commissioners in consultation with the opposition" (DS, January 25, 2006). These two statements do not reflect the whole truth and the record needs to be straightened.
There was an attempt to set a new trend. I distinctly remember that when CEC Abu Hena had resigned, the then PM Sheikh Hasina sent a letter to the leader of the opposition Begum Khaleda Zia inviting her for a discussion regarding appointment of new CEC.
But unfortunately Begum Khaleda Zia turned down the offer. There was no constitutional obligation to consult the leader of the opposition. It was only a sagacious political gesture of Sheikh Hasina. On being rebuffed, MA Sayed was nominated for CEC and thus the prospect of a new political culture of consultation with the opposition on issues of national importance was nipped in the bud.
Attempt to hold an international seminar on fair election by international agencies and development partners has been stalled by the government. Perhaps ruling alliance dreaded that it might sensitize the people's demand for a fair election. Recently, the visiting foreign dignitaries have expressed their concern and reiterated the crucial need for a fair and credible election on a level playing field. There were offers of mediation too.
The hitherto unveiled blueprint of election engineering suggests that mere perfunctory changes in CTG system at the top or a casual change of horses at the Election Commission are not enough to ensure a free and fair election. The all permeating malignancy has trickled down the tiers to grassroots levels which cannot be cured by simple medication at the top. A package of overhauling is needed upon which rests the future of democracy in the country. In fact, the CTG system (Art 58) was incorporated overnight into the constitution in 1996 without giving enough time to debate and examine its pros and cons. This left scope for razor-thin manipulation which betrayed the very intent and philosophy of the CTG system. Now is the time to right the wrongs. Constitution is not anything ordained that cannot be touched.
An immediate dialogue between the government and the opposition to break the impasse is the call of the hour. It can be held inside the Parliament or even outside. The PM has hinted at forming a committee with members drawn from both the sides. Its details, modality and a time frame are yet to be known. Wisdom is not the monopoly of the ruling party. If politics is the art of achieving the possible then facts and rationality should prevail upon obstinacy. Any deceptive procrastination will only jeopardize the future of this fledgling democracy. The beauty of a robust democratic culture lies in regarding the leader of the opposition in the parliament as country's Prime Minister in waiting, a culture that has never grown on this soil.
A former PM of a vibrant democracy had once lamented at a relaxed moment, "In your country the government in power regards the opposition as enemy while in our culture we regard it as a mere adversary." Conversely, vengeance and mistrust is so ingrained in our national politics that we hear the PM labeling sedition charges against the leader of the opposition in public meetings while cases against self-confessed terrorists blasting bombs to unseat a legally constituted government are yet to be charged with sedition.
As the crisis looms large in the horizon a clarion call has come from a person no less important than Professor Yunus. He is the person who made Bangladesh known to the world through his innovative micro-credit programme. There may be scope for fine tuning or adding flesh to his ideas but we only hope that this initiative is not sabotaged by the political cliques, thugs and election engineers. There are not too many options left in present situation and we have already heard retorts from a top notch of the ruling party against his ideas.
We do not know when and how the desired reforms in EC & CTG will come. If it comes too late and in a too little form, the harm will be irreversible. A dispassionate look at the cobweb of events that have befallen us smacks of an impending misfortune. The engineering that has so far been unearthed is only tip of an iceberg floating on water.
Two scenarios may be contemplated. Under the first scenario: When all election engineering is completed, its nuts and bolts tightly fixed and controversial voter list finalised, the BNP and its allies in a show of magnanimity amends part of the constitution related to CTG and agrees to reconstitute the EC as demanded by opposition just few months before its term expires. It can blow trumpet by saying that opposition's demands have been met and there exists no more ground for the opposition to grumble. Then people at home and friends abroad will praise BNP for its magnanimity and ask opposition to go for election and refrain from creating any more fuss as their demands have already been met.
Then it becomes a situation of fait accompli and getting redress in any higher court is not a very optimistic idea. In such a scenario how the opposition is going to react? If it goes for election it will only put its head into a well-laid-out trap which has been perfected through years of election engineering. Mass upsurge may be an option. But are the people prepared for it? Can the opposition leadership infuse the critical momentum needed to ignite a mass upsurge? One has to look carefully at the realities of situation at the ground level.
The second scenario: The BNP-led alliance quits anytime from now without amending constitution or reforming the EC structure. As per constitution the CTG will be immediately installed with KM Hassan as chief with its constitutional obligation to hold election in 90 days or 90 more days in certain special circumstances. In that case the opposition is left with two bitter options. Either give in to the fait accompli and participate in the election or boycott the election. The first option is close to the scenario described in above para. If the second option of election boycott is chosen, what is next?
Realities suggest that once in power through an election (though not participated by major political parties) the new government can cling to power by flexing coercive government machineries at home while placating foreign powers by giving them concessions in matters of their interest. There has been a paradigm shift in international relations and global partnership. The heavy weight foreign powers will be muted as long as their purpose is served, no matter who in power or how it came to power. Amid such a scenario can the spring of 1996 revisit us in 2007? Each option has far reaching ramifications and carries an exorbitant price tag to be paid by our succeeding generations.