Thursday, September 13, 2007

Elections ’08: Power to the People

Ambassador Butenis bemoaned recently that she could not see “free and fair” election in Bangladesh before leaving for her new assignment in Iraq. I too share the good ambassador’s frustration. As a Bangladeshi citizen I too would want that our nation could move forward down the democratic path with another of our free and fair elections. After all is not democracy the ultimate destination of any free nation? But then I got thinking? Are we actually a democratic country? Were we ever a democratic country?

I know it is fashionable to say that we have been a practicing democracy since the elections of 1991. After over throwing an autocrat through a popular people lead revolt, we truly had a democratic election. Well participated and actively contested, this election offered hope to the citizens. Unfortunately it has been a downward slide for the nation since then. Though we have had two more “democratic” elections, I am afraid we have not achieved “democracy”!

One definition of the word democracy is “the free and equal right of every person to participate in a system of government, often practiced by electing representatives of the people by the people.” So have we had free participation? To an election I suppose, but what about then to the governance afterwards? Have even the Parliamentarians we elected been able to participate in the process we elected them to? Now I am sure I don’t need to debate here the utter failure of the experimentation. Even the ardent supporters of the past regimes will agree with me, that the failure of democracy to live true to its definition is unquestionable.

Ambassador Butenis, I am sure will soon find out in her new posting, that an election for the sake of an election is no indication of people’s will. It is easy to hold an election but quite different to usher in participation in the political process. So if “free and fair” elections do not necessarily give us democracy, should that be our only goal? Or should our aim be of a higher calling? Maybe to ensure that participation of a vast majority of our citizens in government and the processes of governance should be the ultimate aim of any reform process.

Over the last thousand years, Bangalees have not had much autonomous democratic control of their destinies. We have been ruled during this time from Delhi or London or Islamabad. Even since 1971, our political leaders have often been autocratic leaders. So theoretically speaking we have had at best 15 years in the last 1500 years of free rule. Given this, should we be so sure of what democracy or which model of democracy suits us best? Should we not even spend some time on deliberating on our structure of government and representation?

Let us assume for sake of argument that you good readers have said yes to the questions above and have opted for some debate on the path to democracy we should take. In that case could I offer an alternative roadmap to democracy?

I am a firm believer in the power of the Demos in democracy. That is the common man in the street (or in this case villages) should not only have a say in but also participate in the political process. In our previous incarnation of government, even in the best of light, was limited to 300 or so parliamentarians. Mind you I am not even getting into the debate of Article 70, which in effect, coupled with megalomaniac leaders and ineffective party structure, concentrated power in the hands of, at best 5 people! This concentration of centralised power lead to its wide-scale abuse. Now say if we could divorce the unbridled authority that the legislative members have on the development cash cows and disseminate that to local authority, we would be achieving two things. One we will allow local citizens to have a direct say on what development priorities of a local area should be. And secondly we would allow legislators fulfil their number one task – to legislate.

This simple relook at what democracy actually means will achieve to give power back to the people where it should have come from the first place. Local Upazila Parishads will be allocated a development budget which they will decide on without the interference of the, till date, ever powerful MP. As UP leadership in vast majority of the cases live in the local area and come into interaction with their constituents on a day to day basis, I believe they will be more answerable than the absentee landlords of our previous Jatiya Sangsad. This devolution of power from the central authority to many local authorities will have the most pliable change in the fabric of governance in the nation. And that my friend in my book is the best example of democracy I can think of.

So if keeping to the Caretaker Government’s announced timetable, we have local authority elections by December 2008, we fulfil pledge we took as a nation on 1/11 ’07 of transferring power to an elected government at the earliest possible time.

Now now, I am sure there are puritans amongst us who will equate only Parliamentary elections to democratic handover of power. But why is that the only criteria, the only benchmark of democracy? With my local authority elections (and mind you, effective devolution of power) we are achieving a far stronger participation in governance than any Parliamentary elections under our old structure will allow us.

I am sure the next question on everyone’s minds is, does the unelected Caretaker Government stay on forever? Well of course not. Say we give the elected UP a year to settle in and find their foothold in government. In December 2009 (or Q1 ’10) we hold an election to a “Constitutional Assembly”. I am sure I have a few perplexed readers on my hand. Why do we need to do this? Well easy, we are not sure of what model we should follow. Do we have, say, two houses of Parliament? Or should we replace first-past-the-post with proportional representation? Or even how do we ensure equitable participation of citizens regardless of gender, religious beliefs or ethnic bias? And thousand other questions like this need to be asked, and more importantly debated and answered. Only after this process (say near the end of 2010 or early 2011) we should be bold enough to venture into a Parliamentary election.

I know many of my readers are sceptical of allowing an unelected CTG stay in power for so long. But the solution to that is in two folds. Firstly as discussed often, we need to broad base the actual cabinet. The idea of a National Unity Government (NUG) drawing from a larger cross section of political parties and apolitical activists (I did not want to use the word “civil society”) seems quite attractive a proposition. Secondly on a supervisory role we have a “Panel of Elders”. Say a body of 10 prominent and acceptable elders who act as a national conscience. The NUG will fix policy and implement them and the Panel of Elder will offer advice, guidance and most importantly critic.

The election for the sake of an election is not and cannot be the only answer to democracy. It is through a creative re-evaluation of what the ultimate objective of the reform process is, will we be able to fix priorities that will help us achieve a robust and long-term solution to the problem that have plagued our race for a millennium. There is an earnest effort for the citizens of Bangladesh to break out of the endless cycle of cynicism and corruption. Our friend Ambassador Butenis and her colleagues I am sure will appreciate this desire for self-rule that yearns in the heart of most Bangladeshis. And hopefully they will accept the paradox that for the emergence of true democracy, the only target cannot be the speed at which we attain it.

17 comments:

Russoue said...

Well written.

tacit said...

Indeed, well written. However, I don't think you go far enough. Given the scope of its reforms, and the serious challenge facing the nation, I think the CTG should be given at least a decade. After all, what's a couple of years as we try to shake off 1500 years of rule from Islamabad, Delhi or London? The term National Unity Government is excellent, how ever did you think up of it? The CTG should also raise a para-military force composed of its loyalists, as a lasting gift to the nation. As a reminder of what a close shave we were saved from in 1/11, we should rename Dhaka Moeenpur. And lastly, give yourself a pat on the back.

Nazim Farhan Choudhury said...

Scarcasm! Ah love it!

Counter-arguements my friend?

tacit said...

Certainly. http://sotacit.wordpress.com/2007/09/16/one-exit-strategy/

I apologize in advance if it a breach of netiquette to answer a post with a link.

Nazim Farhan Choudhury said...

Readers: Please do read the thread on SoTacit's blogsite if you want to look at a few follow-up comments.

Nazim Farhan Choudhury said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Salam Dhaka said...

Farhan,

"The idea of a National Unity Government (NUG) drawing from a larger cross section of political parties and apolitical activists (I did not want to use the word “civil society”) seems quite attractive a proposition."

My question: Attractive to whom?

"Say a body of 10 prominent and acceptable elders who act as a national conscience"

My question: Acceptable to whom?

tanoydutta said...

Farhan,

Same question to you ? Acceptable to whom? I am also confused buddy

Tanoy

FZ said...

In the history of Bangladesh and East Pakistan, all the non elected military led (or backed(?)) govts have always tried to hold local body election before the parliamentary election. Ayub Khan went for 'Basic Democracy' where the people voted for Fatima Jinnah, but the elected 80000 basic democrats opted for Ayub Khan. Same goes with Ershad and Upazilla porishod. Zia arranged a farcical referendum.

Therefore your proposal will be attractive to this military led govt. Firstly it gives them an opportunity to stay in power for longer. Secondly, it will be easier to manipulate some 30000 UP members than to manipulate 9 crore voters. Thirdly, the camouflage will be more shock proof with frequent election in consecutive years and the change of the puppet head of the govt.

Anonymous said...

It will also give my father the opportunity to beat people like Dr. Mahbub and take away mahbub's house.

How can people be so cheap?

Is one nomination paper more worthy than a democracy?

Yes, I and my father want a national unity government, so that we do not have to fight for getting nominated for the election. we can rule, we can snatch and we can start a smear campaign against anybody we want with all our might.

Thank you and your great daddy for what we have today. This business of local govt. election before the national election, not the first time in the history of BD.

Nazim Farhan Choudhury said...

Very interesting Anon that you hear someone put out an allegation and you start putting out venomous statements.

Well I have two things to say:
1. The matter with Dr Mahbub are in court including a possible libel suit against him. So any discussion on my part will be sub-judious.
2. Anything my father (or I) have done or not done does not change the fact that Bangladesh needs to give political power back to the people.

Anonymous said...

Or, Bangladesh needs to give the power back to elites?

Elites after failing to be among the general population had to come through the back door.

About the criminal activity of Mr. Nazim, Why on earth police is not taking the case? Do you have any explanation for that? Why do you have to go to court anyway after the lease term is over? Why aren't you vacating the place after being served notice to vacate 3 times.

If the matter is being settled in court,as per your claim, why on earth did you have to beat up Mr. Mahbub?


Now coming back to your facts? What ever you are proposing, is it something new in the history of Bangladesh? Not really, after all. A method tried and tested by none other than Ershad in the recent past to tighten his grip on power. Take a look for your self.
http://countrystudies.us/bangladesh/90.htm
http://countrystudies.us/bangladesh/91.htm
http://countrystudies.us/bangladesh/92.htm
http://countrystudies.us/bangladesh/93.htm

Finally, it is nice to see how elitist minds get upset for their failure to get nomination in election and starts campaigns like Firiye dao Bangladesh.
If your father was so confident about his ability why did not he contest as an independent in 2001 election?

Nazim Farhan Choudhury said...

Again I will not take up the issue of our cases vs. Dr. Mahbub. Specially with someone who is hiding behind an Anon cover.

Of the two other points that you have raised:

1. after his election defeat in 1991 and his disillusion with the BNP government my father decided to retire from politics. M personal opinion of the matter being that it was a loss to the nation.

2. Just because some previous leaders have abused the system it does not mean it is without merit. Local government if deployed in earnest is a very powerful agent of democracy. I have no illusions that this is not without its own roadblocks. But it is still the best alternate we have got.

In the only change that I will suggest from my article is that we should not wait as late as Dec 08 to have these elections but earlier if possible.

Most arguements I hear seems to rotate around Ershad used it to consolidate power. Fine. But is it not time that "nay-sayers" give some alternative solutions?

Anonymous said...

You father did not leave politics.
Period. Your father is Mr. Nazim Kamran Chowdhury. He did not leave politics.

If he had left politics. Why did he join LDP?
http://au.news.yahoo.com/061027/3/112w7.html

He was taking his personal elitist revenge on BNP for not getting nominated by BNP in 2001. Period.

Elites are like snakes. They do not want the power to go to the people. They want power for themselves. We have seen enough of these in the world history. Whatever elitist plan is, it is all to consolidate elite power.

I do not have whole bunch of powerful relatives in CTG. I do not want to experience the same fate as that of Mr. Mahbub. That's why I would like to remain as anon.

Nazim Farhan Choudhury said...

Snake?? I always thought my father was a Dragon! :)

Yes we did read the rumours of him joining LDP. Matter of fact one of the TV channel even carried his name of the list. But unfortunately it isn't true. As you can understand from my writing I quite like Mahi B and would have gone along if he did actually joined LDP. But alas he didn't. (Oh by the way your link didn't work. Can you resend? Thanks)

Incidentally if you want to get your facts right, he was not asked in 1996 when Saifur Rahman contested that Parliamentary seat. In 2001 he was offered and he refused. And before you get your pants on fire... in 2006 papers in Sylhet speculated his name (and mine). But neither of us were asked nor were we interested at that point. He because he had retired. And I because I would consider running only after Joy would take the helm of AL.

I would rather put the point across that you are an elite as you don't want local government elections. I am arguing otherwise. :)

Anonymous said...

Back in April one of the advisors named Giti Ara Safia Chowdhury said, " I do not have time to think about the rights of people, I am thinking about my own rights."

Is she your mother? Do not take it otherwise, I just wanted to confirm.

Anonymous said...

Some people here appear more interested in making personal attacks than debate policy.

They just want their Falu, Babar, Khaleda, Hasina back no matter how undemocratic and corrupt these people are, as long they have been "elected" by using their muscle power and black money.

"Elected" tirants are worse than what we have now.