Political Impasse and National Crisis

During the exchange of views and analysis of the prevailing political situation, it was evident that the flawed and controversial elections of January 5, 2014 and the government posture of serving a full five-year term before scheduling another general election lay at the heart of the political confrontation. This position of the new government was a significant departure from the Awami League earlier pre-election commitment to a early general election after the January 2014 event. Another very important factor for the prevailing climate of political confrontation was the inexplicable denial of legitimate political dissent or activity to significant players on the political scene in what is supposed to be a democracy. The violence and acts of arson resulting in scores of death and mindless destruction of property, which in itself is extremely tragic and regrettable, has been spawned by this rigidity of the government and the party in office in the first part and on the other, by the political opposition inability to articulate pragmatic and practical alternatives in the light of constitutional requirements that have been enacted since the January 2014 elections.

However, the discussants observed that the oft-repeated conflicting and self contradictory statements made by cabinet ministers, political leaders and the Awami League high command lends credence to the belief that it is under some pressure, both internal and external, to reconsider its rigid posture. According to experienced political analysts, a mid-term or interim election could be held either in 2015 or by 2016. What is apprehended is that it may be a repeat of January 2014 as the Awami League and the prime minister are unlikely to preside over their own ouster from office by a genuinely free, fair and inclusive election that meets the accepted criteria of democracies.

One option that appeared to have some potential for resolving the current crisis was for the main opposition parties, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and its allies, to suggest to the Awami League and the government to schedule general elections with the incumbent prime minister as head of the government of an interim administration but with limited powers. The second option is to reconstitute the Election Commission appointed on the basis of consensus of all political stakeholders making it truly independent. This reconstituted commission, for the period leading up to and the conclusion of national parliamentary elections, could take office within a pre-determined fixed time frame. Third, the Election Commission could then be invested with full powers to control and oversee six key ministries home affairs, LGRD and cooperatives, finance, defence, foreign affairs and public administration for the period leading up to and the conclusion of national parliamentary elections. During this period, all decisions of the Election Commission would be binding on the executive organs of the state to implement its decisions. In effect, the commission will act as if it is the interim government. Immediately after the elected party takes office, the Election Commission voluntarily resigns clearing the way to the appointing of a new and independent Election Commission that is vested by the incumbent government, with necessary powers of being independent.

The Election Commission would perhaps have to undertake extensive repositioning of field posts such as the officers-in-charge, upazila nirbahi officers, superintendents of police, and deputy commissioners to preempt election engineering as there are very credible and serious allegations of politicisation of the bureaucracy, particularly the law enforcement agencies and the district administration that are important components of the election process and ranking officials of which have lately been publicly talking and acting like political activists instead of public servants that they are.

It was pointed out that whilst the fourth amendment to the constitution in 1974 sounded the death knell of multi-party parliamentary democracy of the Westminster model, the 15th amendment is far worse as it has closed the doors to free, fair and all inclusive election. The 16th amendment seriously undermines the freedom of press and the freedom of speech. Together, these two amendments constitute a very palpable roll-back of democracy in Bangladesh.

Article 123 of the constitution is considered among the other major shortcomings of the constitution which were thought to be impediments to healthy democratic norms and practices. The present framework permits the simultaneous existence of two parliaments. This was considered absurd and unprecedented.

Similarly Articles 57 (3), 123 (3), 123(b) and 55 (2) vests all executive powers with the prime minister and not only that, Article 57(3) overrides Article 55 (2). As per Article 357 (3), the incumbent prime minister can stay on until a new prime minister has been elected. Thus the prime minister tenure becomes indefinite.

There was consensus that Bangladesh should follow similar guidelines as set forth in the Indian Supreme Court ruling 119 on the empowerment of the election commission to conduct unfettered, free and fair elections.

Since the 15th and the 16th amendments alter the fundamental character of the constitution as stipulated under Article 7(1) and 7(2) and because these articles still remain in force, there is scope for legally challenging the 15th and the 16th amendment.

Although a dialogue among political stakeholders is the conventional way out of this impasse, it is a fact that sometimes attaining meaningful democracy requires action beyond the scope of constitutional technicalities and legal wrangling. A people will and aspirations lie at the heart of nationhood. Bangladesh war of independence was fought defying the constitutionality of the state of Pakistan and for fundamental democratic right to choose ones representative through free, fair elections and that is now in peril.

Events of the last few months in terms of serious governance deficit and the absence of accountability are alarming to all law-abiding, peaceful citizens who expect their political leaders to have a vision that is inclusive of every citizen of this nation irrespective of political persuasion, religion, or creed. In fulfilling this onerous responsibility, the incumbent party has to step up to its role in claiming the mantle of national government that energised the Bangabandhu-led war of liberation of 1971.