There is a growing anxiety at home and abroad over when and how the upcoming parliamentary election would take place. The anxiety stems from the uncompromising positions taken by the government and the opposition. The prime minister and her colleagues have reiterated that the election would be held in accordance with the constitution. implying that the election would be held while the ruling coalition would still be in power. The opposition parties have demanded that a neutral caretaker government should preside over the polls. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, in an address to the nation on October 18, proposed to form an “all-party government” to oversee the polls. She invited nominations for ministerial positions from the opposition party, Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). Though the details of the all-party government have not been revealed, it has been clarified by the Awami League’s spokesman that Sheikh Hasina would remain the prime minister in the new setup. The BNP believes the election would not be free and fair as long as the incumbent prime minister remains the head of the government. It wants the restoration of the caretaker government.
The question is why the opposition is not willing to accept the constitutional trajectory since the government pledged undeniable commitment to the constitution. Conversely, why the government is impervious to the demand of the opposition since the caretaker system has been in place for the past 17 years? The answer could be found in the conducts of the ruling as well as of the opposition party. The ruling party knows well that in all the elections, held under the caretaker government, the party in power was defeated. The ruling party is, therefore, afraid that history might repeat if the next election is also held under the caretaker government. Why the ruling party suffered defeat in these elections is beyond the purview of this article but suffice it to say that poor governance, corruption, lack of respect to the opposition contributed to the humiliating defeat. The opposition party scored victory not because it had a brilliant performance in the previous term; by default, it won the election. This is the underlying reason of the ruling party’s faith in constitutionalism and opposition party’s commitment to the caretaker system.
Reaffirming the commitment to democracy, Prime Minister Hasina and her colleagues said they would not invite an unelected body to conduct the polls. In defence of their position, they argued that the previous caretaker government had stayed in power longer than stipulated and harassed political leaders and workers.
Without going into a debate, it could be pointed out that the last caretaker government came to power under extraordinary circumstances, which resulted from the irresponsible actions of major political parties. The caretaker government restored law and order, and people, at large, had welcomed the steps it had taken. The Election Commission was reconstituted by replacing the controversial commissioners. The Commission imposed a code of conduct on political parties, established election protocol, introduced ID cards for the voters and updated the voters list deleting 1.9 million spurious voters. The people could observe a degree of sanity in the conduct of the political parties and their members. Unfortunately, the code of conduct has been relaxed after the new Election Commission took office. A slide in the behaviour of the political parties is now very conspicuous.
The BNP did not attend the session of the parliament when the caretaker system was abrogated. Had its members been in the parliament they could have highlighted the merit of the system and exposed the ulterior motive of the Awami League behind scrapping the system. Their participation in the debate might not have deterred the bill being passed but people would have witnessed that the opposition tried to retain the system in order to ensure free and fair national polls. The opposition parties have genuine concern that the polls conducted under the incumbent government would have the risk of being convoluted in favour of the ruling party’s candidates. None of the elections held under the political governments were free from interference. Even the first general election held in 1973 was not immune of interference from the heavyweights of the ruling party.
Now there is a clear dichotomy in the political arena. The ruling Awami League favours holding the election under the interim government led by Sheikh Hasina, and they are already on the campaign spree. The BNP and its partners are threatening to frustrate the polls if it is not overseen by the caretaker system. There has been indication that the election would be held in the beginning of January 2014, regardless of the BNP’s participation.
In this climate of growing tension, government officials, business community, and people, in general, are concerned about the future of the country. Both the ruling and the opposition alliances are getting ready for the showdown. However, the latest proposal of an all-party government set-up provides a pedestal for dialogue and the opposition parties should seize this opportunity to evolve an acceptable mechanism.
The centrepiece of disagreement remains who would oversee the general election. The opposition parties do not trust government led by Sheikh Hasina, and want a different authority in its place. The Awami League, apparently, does not want the involvement of non-elected persons to preside over the election. If the problem narrows down to this level then multiple options could be worked out. One of the proposals could be to let the ruling coalition nominate five members of the parliament, but not members of the cabinet from its block, and the opposition parties nominate another five members from amongst them. Let the Speaker form the interim government for three months, herself as the chief of the government.
The next question would be the allocation of the portfolios amongst the members. Certain ministries like the ministry of home, ministry of law and ministry in charge of cabinet division would assume greater importance during the election period. These ministries should be allocated to members belonging to different parties, and not monopolised by one single party. This will be a bi-partisan government — not the incumbent government — that would oversee the election. It will comprise of the elected members of the parliament, and therefore, neither unconstitutional nor unelected. The above formula meets the concerns of both the ruling and the opposition parties to a great extent. Both the ruling coalition and the opposition alliance should be willing to compromise for national interest.
The Election Commission has to be strengthened and allowed to function as an independent body. Some of the commissioners have, by dint of loose talks, already earned the wrath of political parties. They need to be restrained and focus on the task that lies ahead.
The notion of having parliamentary election keeping the BNP, the largest opposition party, out of the electoral process would be preposterous, and an exercise in futility. The BNP, in its worst performance, in the most difficult period, had secured 33 percent votes of the population. Twice in the past it was able to form the government, and now it is the leading opposition party in the parliament. The European Union has already announced it would not send observers to monitor the polls, if held, without the participation of major opposition parties. This would not guarantee a full term office for the victorious party.
In this juncture the president of Bangladesh cannot confine himself to being a constitutional head, and remain a bystander. He should initiate dialogue with all the stakeholders including political parties, leading jurists, civic societies and create public opinion in favour of a just solution. He cannot play the role of Nero while Rome is burning.
The writer is a former official of the United Nations