A winning formula

No wonder politicians and public alike get quite excited about the prospect of such an event, especially in a transition society like Bangladesh. This may also explain the pre-occupation of politicians with the pre-election period. Experience shows that in Bangladesh this process starts quite early -- the morning-after. Even before the counting of votes is over, politicians are ready to refute and recriminate with clockwork precision.

This keen interest in the process of elections, which would include (among others) issues such as the authenticity of the voter roll, the independence of the election commission, and the neutrality of state apparatus, should be promoted and encouraged if they are seen as means to achieving a certain end.

Globally the issue of political accountability has been on ascendancy since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Several factors have contributed to this greater focus on political institutions: emergence of a uni-polar international system, liberalization of trade, proliferation of information and communication technology, faster economic growth and increasing prosperity, at times skewed, among nations.

Bangladesh, too, has also been marginally affected by these global phenomena -- political parties have gained prominence over civil-military bureaucratic regimes, narrowing of ideological differences between major political parties, surge of private wealth due to impressive growth of the export-orientated industry, influx of people from the rural to urban areas, an unprecedented increase in flow of information by way of multiplication of electronic media and telephony, and finally a steady rise in expectation of improved state of governance within Bangladesh.

Over the same period Bangladesh has gradually found itself in international limelight, again due to other forces of globalization. Whether it is the level of foreign direct investment or the extent of child labour in the workforce or the level of corruption in the public and private sectors or the kind of treatment meted out to its journalists or the number of girls attending primary schools or the efficiency of its ports, Bangladesh has found itself ranked with countries in various indices.

Sadly the message from these indices has been rather dismal. Despite some favourable social indicators (women have become the silent entrepreneurs, more girls are enrolled in primary schools than boys, the fertility, mortality and morbidity rates have fallen, and the list is not exhaustive) the definite feeling (or the dreaded word "perception") among the populace has been rather negative. This "feel-bad" factor brings me back to the "means and end" dilemma.

In terms of means, the citizens of Bangladesh have struggled and died to secure the restoration of democracy, argued and supported the constitutional changes to ensure a neutral administration to oversee the election process, voted maturely and tactically to give the major political parties the opportunity to form majority governments every five years, and despite financial allurement the voters have thrown out well-known corrupt Members of Parliament at successive elections.

But the common complaint on the lips of many Bangladeshis has been that despite repeated attempts to get the country on the track of greater accountability and general prosperity the opposite has happened -- a few have become extremely wealthy by unfair and corrupt means at the expense of poor infrastructure, deteriorating public service, weakening institutions, falling public standards and values, and undermining of rule of law. To rub salt into the collective national wound the culprits have accomplished such misdeeds in the name of people, democracy or development and with total impunity.

So, the conundrum is that whatever the changes (means) the result (end) remains the same -- repeated brazen misrule. It seems that the corrupt and hypocritical politicians have the last laugh at the expense of millions of poor but enterprising men and women. As the next elections approach there is a feeling of deja vu. As a nation we have traveled this path before -- the euphemistic lover's garden path.

It is in this context that I find the findings and analysis of Mr NK Choudhury (DS Oct 6) refreshing and regenerating. What I take from his erudite piece is as follows: (i) the major political parties have failed to deliver their promises despite clear mandate from their constituents, (ii) the major political parties have exhausted their "goodwill" -- the so-called vote-bank, (iii) the minor political parties are inconsequential on their own -- this is further reinforced by the "first-past-the-post" electoral system that we have in operation in Bangladesh, (iv) a large chunk (over 50%) of voters are "sitting on the fence" not knowing which way to jump, (v) the major political parties (or, for that matter the minor ones too) are staring at a life-time opportunity to woo the fence-sitters with bold departures, and finally, other things being equal (that is, elections taking place and under free and fair conditions), (vi) a hung parliament is a distinct possibility.

This brings me to my concluding thoughts. The window of opportunity (over 50% floating voters) that Mr Choudhury has alluded to fits in well with another provocative idea, and the main exponent of this is none other than our Nobel Laureate, Professor Mohammed Yunus. A few months back Professor Yunus declared his dream -- his vision of honest and clean men and women coming forward to be counted. He threw a challenge to the political parties to nominate such candidates and to give the electorate an opportunity to elect Members of Parliament who will put the national interest first. Professor Yunus echoed a national yearning for change -- a change in terms of personalities and policies, attitude and approach, content and character, reconciliation and reflection, forward-looking, and foresight -- qualities that Bangladeshis have in abundance. History is unequivocal on this point -- nations have moved forward primarily due to enlightened leadership.

So is leadership the missing puzzle in the "means and end" conundrum? Since 1971 Bangladesh has experimented with different types of government -- civilian, military, bureaucratic, democratic -- but they have failed to deliver either accountable government or good governance. The politicians have been given many opportunities but they have let the people down.

In Asia many countries, which used to at par with Bangladesh, have long since overtaken us and have moved into the middle-income league. As a nation this is a suicidal course -- pre-meditated action on the part of a few to cripple the nation forever. This is not unknown as many countries are suffering from such poor political leadership but it is not a permanent phenomenon. Yews, Mahathirs, Mandelas, Pings are also to be found. The question is: "Do we have them in Bangladesh?"

As we approach another general election a window is ajar letting through a ray of hope. Professor Yunus and his likes, who have brought much goodwill and fame to an otherwise wretched Bangladesh, are enticing the nation with another simple but dangerous idea -- similar to his groundbreaking concept of micro-finance.

Over the last thirty years, micro-finance has achieved a silent revolution in the countryside of Bangladesh. The wretched women have become respectable and powerful. They have become the beacon of hope. The call for clean candidates can be another simple solution for Bangladesh to address the intractable issue of governance. The means of free and fair elections together with clean candidates could ultimately deliver the kind of government that could result in good governance.

Finally a winning formula! Good governance, I feel, is a function of clean candidates plus free and fair elections over time. Therefore

Manzoor Hasan is Director, Centre for Governance Studies, Brac University.