Published in the Weekly Holiday
M.
Serajul Islam
The
Prime Minister’s recent announcement that the next general election would be
held under the Westminster model confused most ordinary folks of the country. They
did not know that the name Westminster is derived from Westminster Palace, the
seat of the British parliament for which the British parliamentary system is
also known as the Westminster system after which most parliamentary systems
worldwide are modeled. The type of
election the Prime Minister wants to hold in Bangladesh is a part of the
Westminster type of parliamentary system.
If the people knew these facts, they would have liked to request her in
bended knees and folded hands to make an exception for the sake of the country
and hold the next national election under a un-Westminster system instead.
Such
a request would make sense for a wide array of reasons. For one, the Prime
Minister wants to follow the Westminster model of election where the country
follows little else of the Westminster parliamentary system. The Westminster system has evolved over
centuries as the structure for ensuring and sustaining Great Britain’s
democratic governance. The Westminster type election is the icing on the cake
of British democracy. Electoral laws and customs/conventions related to holding
national elections in Great Britain under the Westminster model are sacrosanct
that no power in the country can violate.
In Bangladesh, the Prime Minister is insisting
upon the Westminster model election without democracy to back it. She is thus
insisting upon the icing without the cake. Further, she is also forgetting that
her party had forced the BNP led Government in 1996 to reject the Westminster model
in favour of the caretaker government (CTG) and that 3 elections have been held
under this un-Westminster type election through which the people have voted
freely and fairly and the party they
favoured went to power. Furthermore, her
party used its 3/4th majority in the current parliament to reject
the CTG for the Westminster model only when it no longer served its interests
against the wishes of the main opposition political party, the BNP.
In
rejecting the Westminster model for the CTG and now rejecting the CTG for the
Westminster model again, the Prime Minister has failed to grasp what makes the
Westminster model work for sustaining democracy. The Westminster model takes
for granted two fundamental elements in the process of holding elections. First, voters must be free to elect the party
of their choice based on universal adult franchise. Second, political parties must
be assured beyond an iota of doubt a fair and level playing ground where they all not only enjoy equal rights and opportunities; the question of any party even
considering anything to the contrary must be eliminated by laws, customs and
conventions. In the Westminster model a political party simply cannot feel that
it is being forcibly kept out from contesting by the party in power; not even
in a nightmare.
In
Bangladesh, the absence of what makes the Westminster model work –laws,
customs/conventions related to elections - has been established twice already; once by
the AL and now by the BNP. In 1991-96, the Awami League demanded a
un-Westminster like election because it did not trust that a Westminster model would
work with Prime Minister Begum Khaleda Zia as the head of the Interim
Government. Now the BNP is opposing the Westminster model because of the same
reason; it does not trust the Westminster model would work under Sheikh Hasina.
If the Prime Minister spared a moment and considered what motivated her and her
party to bring governance to a halt by over 170 days of hartal for establishing
the CTG in place of the Westminster model, she would no doubt understand the
BNP’s insistence for the CTG.
The
issue here of course is a simple one; a matter of trust. In Great Britain, the
Westminster model works because trust is the essence of the model in
relationship among the political parties; a matter taken for granted. In
Bangladesh, we must have a un-Westminster type election because the element of
trust between the ruling party and the opposition is non-existent and the
possibility of that trust being established in Bangladesh’s politics anytime
soon is not even in the realm of possibility. Another slight digression would
make the point why a Westminster model cannot work in Bangladesh a little
clearer to the readers. In Great Britain, the voters rejected Sir Winston
Churchill in the 1946 elections for a number of reasons among which were their
concerns that he had been allowed too much power during the war to head a
democratic government after the war was over. The voters thus voted the Labour
Party under Clement Atlee.
Nevertheless,
the British are wise by experience and cultured by history and tradition and as
a nation not ungrateful. They thus voted Sir Winston back to power in 1951
after a term of Clement Atlee to express their gratitude for his war efforts. Sir
Winston eventually retired from politics in 1955 while still in power. On his
departure, his parliamentary colleagues wanted to build a bust for him in
recognition of his contribution to the war efforts in the premises of
Westminster. Sir Winston said he could accept the honour if one was built for the
leader of the opposition Earl Atlee too who he thought had made equal contribution
to the British Government’s war efforts! Although political rivals, each
respected the other to a fault! The moral of this short digression is a simple
one; in the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy, in addition to trust
between the party in power and the opposition, there is respect between the two.
In the British parliamentary system, government comprises the party in power
and the opposition. This is why in the
British parliamentary system; the opposition is called Her Majesty’s
opposition!
The
element of trust upon which the British parliamentary system is based of which
the Westminster model of election is a part has deteriorated substantially in
the Bangladesh context between 1996 and present that makes the BNP’s demand for
the CTG more acceptable today than when the AL had demanded
it to replace the Westminster
model. In 1991-96, the Prime Minister
(then Leader of the Opposition) did not believe the country could have fair and
free elections with Khaleda Zia as head of the Interim Government. She did not
trust Begum Zia. The Prime Minister should know better why Begum Zia today does
not trust her now. The deterioration in the quality of politics apart, the
Prime Minister could consider the way she has made it a habit to speak of the leader
of the opposition in public to better understand why the opposition has little
trust in her to head the Interim Government . On a less personal level, after claiming that
the local government elections were free and fair to dismiss the opposition’s
demand for the CTG, the Prime Minister said in public that the voters have
elected corrupt and terrorist elements! Thus one really cannot blame the BNP as
a political party for feeling that they cannot have a fair deal with the Prime
Minister heading the Interim Government.
It
is now a fact that everybody acknowledges that there is no love lost between
the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. The Prime Minister in
particular should know this better because she just cannot mention the name of
Begum Khaleda Zia without words that speak for themselves. Even her body
language changes when she speaks of her in public. Begum Khaleda Zia also has
shown publicly that her feelings for her nemesis is no better but to give
credit where it is due, she does not abuse or insult her adversary the manner
her adversary does. Therefore, if there was any element of necessity for
accepting the CTG when the AL had demanded it in 1991-96 based on the lack of
trust between the two parties, that
trust has deteriorated many tomes for the worse thus making the BNP’s demand
for CTG today more acceptable than what the situation was when the AL had
demanded it.
There
is more to this debate that the Prime Minister has introduced between the
Westminster type of election and the CTG, her out of context representation of
the system notwithstanding. The public has sent the message to the ruling party
on the issue quite clearly. Thanks to the advancement these days in the IT
sector, most newspapers today have online versions of their papers. These
papers carry online polls all the time. In these polls, one favorite question
is on the CTG issue. Without fail, public responses have been overwhelmingly in
favour of the CTG system. One of these papers, the most widely read Prothom Alo
carried a survey on the issue. 90% people responded in favour of the CTG!
The
recently concluded city corporation elections were local only in name. It was
fought on national issues. Of these issues, one introduced by the BNP was the
CTG issue. The BNP candidates won these elections comprehensively. The
comprehensive victories of the BNP candidates have added force to their demand
for the CTG. In fact, with the BNP substantially strengthened by the city
corporation victories and the manner in which they won these victories, it will
not be a push over if the government moves ahead and attempts to introduce
Westminster model of elections for Bangladesh. It would be an attempt to
implement a system for which the country’s politics is simply not prepared. It
would by assessment of most political analysts, a prescription to push
Bangladesh to the edge and perhaps a green signal to the extra-constitutional
forces to step in .
In
fact, the Prime Minister’s sudden emphasis of the Westminster model made while
she was on a recent visit to Great Britain has highlighted the inadequacies in
Bangladesh for such a system. It brought to focus the serious imperfections in
Bangladesh’s politics for following the Westminster type of parliamentary
democracy of which the Westminster model of elections is a part. Nevertheless,
Bangladesh has to find and fast, a compromise between the Westminster model/
and the CTG based on realities in Bangladesh’s politics for its survival.
The
AL and the BNP must come to a compromise. As the party in power, the ball is in
the court of the Awami League. The BNP has made it clear it would not
participate in the next national election with Sheikh Hasina as the Prime Minister
of an Interim Government for the same reasons as she had declined to
participate in an interim government to be headed by Begum Khaleda Zia in 1996,
only the reasons for BNP not doing so has been strengthened by deterioration in
the trust element between the two parties. Thus the ruling party should take a
serious look at the current nature of politics and help the country move
forward based on its history as the party that helped the country achieve its
independence.
There
is no alternative to an “inclusive” national election. To achieve that the
first step could be to have someone other than the incumbent Prime Minister to
head the Interim Government to assure the BNP’s participation. If the Prime
Minister is willing to make this courageous move, she could then demand a few
concessions from the BNP. She could as the outgoing Prime Minister nominate
someone from amongst the elected members of the outgoing Parliament from her
party as the Prime Minister of the Interim Government after consultation with
the Opposition. That would satisfy the AL contention that unelected people
cannot elect a democratic government. To further that contention, the two parties could then
decide to share the 10 Ministers (could be increased if necessary) between them
from the parliamentarians where BNP could be given preference in choice of the
Ministries having conceded on the issue of the Prime Minister of the Interim
Government. Given the Jatiya Party’s number of parliamentarians, it too could
be given a share in the distribution of Ministries in the Interim Government.
Bangladesh
is at a historical cross road. A recent World Bank report about the country’s economic
advancement has indicated that in the last one decade, between 2001 and 2010,
the country has made significant progress in areas of economic development and
poverty alleviation. The GDP growth rate has averaged over 5%. The decade has
been shared 5 years by the BNP (2001-2006), two years by the last CTG
(2007-2008) and 3 years by the AL (2008-2010). Although politics has been far
from the way required for unhindered socio-economic development, it was not as
threatening as it has been since 2010. Dark, threatening clouds have gathered
in the horizon that are threatening to not just take away the positive advances
in the country’s socio-economic development but to push the country into
protracted clashes and civil disturbances that could be the beginning of a long winter of discontent.
National
elections, models apart, are for betterment of a country. Unfortunately, the
thought of the next national election in Bangladesh without the opposition brings
with it grave foreboding. The ruling party must consider that the conditions of
holding a Westminster type of election do not exist in Bangladesh. It must also
consider that if the opposition does not participate, such a system of election
would be rendered meaningless. If the ruling party ignores these facts and
still pushes the country to a Westminster model national election, it will send
the country on way to national disaster. Thus the country begs of the ruling
party to give the country a un-Westminster type election and wait for politics
to improve for introducing such a system in Bangladesh. It may help the ruling
party to do the right thing if it considers that Great Britain achieved the
Westminster model of election by perfecting the Westminster type of
parliamentary democracy that took it a very long time. Westminster model
election without Westminster style democracy would be like putting the cart
before the horse.
The writer is a retired career
Ambassador
No comments:
Post a Comment