FB   
 
Powered bysps
        Society for Policy Studies
 
 

 
25 Years After we Became Democratic
Posted:Dec 27, 2015
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 
By Dhaka Tribune, December 28, 2015
 
When a people’s movement toppled military dictator HM Ershad’s rule in December 1990, Bangladesh entered the club of what is popularly known as “Third Wave” democracies. Similar to the experiences of many of these new democracies, the country’s democratic journey has not been smooth.
 
Instead of consolidating or deepening democracy, Bangladesh has been facing persistent challenges of institutionalising the basic foundations of democracy.
 
Bangladesh periodically wanders off the democratic path when the country is not even classified as a “democracy” by international organisations.
 
This happened during 2007-2008, when we were not able to hold the scheduled parliamentary election and the country was ruled by a military-backed civilian government for two years.
 
In 2015, again, Bangladesh had been classified as a “party free” country by the Freedom House.
 
When international organisations or global surveys question our democratic status, many of us in turn start questioning the quality of the democracy of many of our critics.
 
Instead of countering the arguments of our critics and raising questions about the democratic deficits of other countries, we should first try to assess whether we have been able to live up to the standards we ourselves had set for us in 1990.
 
In November 1990, three major political alliances of Bangladesh -- one led by AL, another by the BNP, and the third by five leftist parties -- agreed on a framework to guide the democratic transition of the country from military rule.
 
We should begin by exploring how far our political leaders have implemented the pledges they made to the nation when they signed the three-alliance agreement in 1990.
 
Through the three-alliance agreement, the political leaders pledged their commitment to several key elements of a democratic system.First, they promised to organise free and fair elections through which people’s representatives would derive their mandate to govern the state.
 
Second, they pledged to establish a sovereign parliament which would hold the executive accountable. Third, they promised to uphold the fundamental rights of citizens, independence and neutrality of the judiciary, freedom of the media, and the rule of law to ensure the sustenance of the democratic order.
 
And finally, they promised to follow a democratic code of conduct to guide their actions, particularly in relation to each other. Twenty-five years later, it is pertinent to ask: What is the record of performance of these leaders who signed the agreement?
 
The leaders of two of the alliances, Sheikh Hasina of the AL and Khaleda Zia of the BNP, have taken their turns in ruling the country since 1991. How have they followed up on their commitments?
 
Free and fair elections
 
The three-alliance agreement noted the many undemocratic electoral practices perpetuated by the military rulers, more specifically the practice of engineering elections by the incumbent government to serve its interests.
 
The agreement identified the system of non-party caretaker government as a more appropriate mechanism to organise free and fair parliamentary elections in Bangladesh.
 
The the 1991 parliamentary election, organised by a non-party caretaker government, which was widely recognised as the most free and fair election held so far in independent Bangladesh, brought the BNP to state power.
 
Regrettably, the BNP-led regime abdicated from its commitment to the original tripartite agreement and decided to hold the next election under its own incumbency.
 
Following the flawed by-elections in Mirpur and Magura, the AL-led opposition started a mass movement in 1994 to institutionalise the non-party caretaker system as the poll-time government.
 
The non-party caretaker government system was eventually institutionalised through a constitutional amendment in February 1996.
 
Three parliamentary elections (in June 1996, October 2001, and December 2008) were organised under a non-party caretaker government system which resulted in a relatively peaceful transfer of power through the ballot box, where the incumbent political party/alliance invariably lost the election.
 
But, despite this regular rotation of power, the two major political forces of the country could not come to an agreement about a mutually acceptable arrangement to organise a credible parliamentary election.
 
After each election, the losing party/alliance initially rejected the election results, but eventually accepted it and agreed to take their seats in parliament. However, the ruling parties tried to manipulate the non-party caretaker system to their advantage.
 
Finally the AL-led government, using its overwhelming parliamentary majority, abolished the caretaker system in 2011.
 
It is ironic that it was the AL who led a two year-long mass movement during 1994 to 1996 to institutionalise the non-party caretaker government system.
 
Since 2011, the two major political forces have failed to agree on the framework of a poll-time government. We witnessed a one-sided parliamentary election in 2014 where the majority of parliamentarians were “elected” unopposed.
 
We also witnessed unprecedented violence in the name of movements to “save democracy” led by the political opposition.
 
The political leadership of the two major alliances, who signed the agreement of 1990 to initiate our democratic transition, have now assumed an inflexible, uncompromising attitude of “my way or the highway,” which has created uncertainties about the organisation of future credible parliamentary elections at present. This imperils our democratic future.
 
- See more at: http://www.dhakatribune.com/op-ed/2015/dec/28/25-years-after-we-became-democratic#sthash.syi5gSdA.dpuf
 
Dhaka Tribune, December 28, 2015
 
 
 
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 
Comments (Total Comments 0) Post Comments Post Comment
Review
 
 
 
 
At the global level, 2017 is the year of  complex uncertainty.  The arrival of President Donald Trump in the White House is expected to herald unexpected exigencies that could have a bearing on India’s own security dynamic, writes C. Uday Bhaskar for South Asia Monitor.
 
read-more
The possibility of a Taliban attack targeting Emirati officials is not going down well with analysts writes Monish Gulati
 
read-more
Since late 2015, cultural and political issues have strained relations between the two countries with anti-Indian sentiment growing amongst the government and people of Nepal, writes Dr. Binodkumar Singh for South Asia Monitor.  
 
read-more
The Indo-US strategic partnership has been a source of constant tension in Pak-US ties in recent years. The US has pursued ‘de-hyphenation’ ie dealing with Islamabad and New Delhi relatively independently of each other. The Indo-US strategic partnership has been a source of constant tension in Pak-US ties in recent
 
read-more
Marking the 100th year of its journey in promoting academic research on matters related to Asia and Africa, the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London hosted its 'Centenary and Campaign Celebrations' in New Delhi on January 17, 2017 with the Society for Policy...
 
read-more
The year 2017 is set to be another seismic one for European politics with a number of national and regional elections set to test the region’s appetite for far right, nationalist politics in the wake of Brexit and the election of Donald Trump. The year 2017 is set to be another seismic one for European politics with a num
 
read-more
spotlight image Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe just wrapped up his tour to four Asia-Pacific nations - the Philippines, Australia, Indonesia and Vietnam - Thursday. During the six-day trip, he mentioned the South China Sea disputes on many occasions to keep China in check in the name of maritime security.
 
read-more
Read the transcript of PM Modi's Inaugural Address at Second Raisina Dialogue, New Delhi (January 17, 2017)  
 
read-more
By inviting Sheikh Mohammad bin Zayed al-Nahyan, the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the United Arab Emirates Armed forces, as the chief guest on this year’s Republic Day celebrations, the Modi Government has signaled importance India attaches to its ties with the Emirates.  
 
read-more
In 2012, former Indian defence minister, Jaswant Singh, had reportedly told American journalist Tom Hundley, “There is no Cold Start doctrine… It was an off-the-cuff remark from a former chief of staff. I have been defence minister of the country; I should know.” India’s new army chief, by boldly shattering the
 
read-more
Column-image

What went wrong for the West in Afghanistan? Why couldn't a global coalition led by the world's preeminent military and economic power defeat "a bunch of farmers in plastic sandals on dirt bikes" in a conflict that outlasted b...

 
Column-image

What will be Pakistan's fate? Acts of commission or omission by itself, in/by neighbours, and superpowers far and near have led the nuclear-armed country at a strategic Asian crossroads to emerge as a serious regional and global concern whi...

 
Column-image

Some South African generals, allied with the British forces, sought segregation from the enlisted men, all blacks, after being taken prisoners of war. The surprised German commander told them firmly that they would have to share the same quarte...

 
Column-image

An aching sense of love, loss and yearning permeate this work of fiction which, however, reads like a personal narrative set in an intensely disruptive period of Indian history, and adds to the genre of partition literature, writes Ni...

 
Subscribe to our newsletter
Archive