Introduction:
We have passed about forty three years since independence but our achievements in the spheres of democracy and leadership are not noteworthy. In Bangladesh every political leader or party, civil or military, popular or unpopular, big or small, in or out of power, talk about democratic incessantly. Even so the nation has failed to put it into practice. Parties voted into power to strengthen democracy have all failed to encourage its values. Taking advantage of this situation, military leaders intervened to practice their own version of democracy, which only exacerbated the crisis. The country today is riddle with numerous problems threatening the very development of democracy. The basic fabric of the society has been shaken. In a homogeneous country the character of which could have been an excellent component for uniting the nation - the government has been continuously dividing us within our already divided society and creating enemies after enemies within ourselves. Is it the country we wanted for? Is it the country our predecessors fought for? These are the million dollar questions for the people of Bangladesh, particularly the youth generation of post independence Bangladesh.
Our society with an under developed political culture and poverty ridden illiterate and incompetent masses is lacking democratic political organizations, institutions and practices. However, the prospects for a politically developed and economically prosperous nation is marked by people’s eagerness to democracy and progress, nations march toward a two party system and politicians realization that there is no way but election capture power.
In this work, I aim to briefly outline the Democracy and Leadership crisis in Bangladesh at all levels. Towards the end, I will briefly discuss our duties and responsibilities as expatriate Bangladeshis.
Democracy: Meaning & Concept
The term democracy is derived from the Greek words, demos and Kratos, the former meaning the people and the latter power. Democracy thus means power of the people. It is now regarded as a form of government in which the people rule themselves either directly, or indirectly through their representatives.
Definition of democracy, as a form of government, are various, But like many other definitions in political science, they differ in their content and application (Kapur, 1993). Democracy, according to the Greeks, is the Government in which people rule over themselves. Aristotle considered it as a perverted form of government. Herodotus says, the democracy denotes that form of government in which in the ruling power of the state is largely vested in the members of the community as a whole. In the words of President Abraham Lincoln, it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people (Agarwal, 1991). According to Bryce, “Democracy is that form of government in which the ruling power of a state is legally vested, not in any particular class or classes but in the members of the community as a whole”. Prof. Seeley says, “Democracy is a government in which everybody has a share.”
Among the definitions of democracy given above, the definitions of Dicey, Bryce, Abraham Lincoln and Gettell are more important and popular. In brief, we can say that democracy is that form of government in which the sovereign power of the state is in the hands of the people and people are the source of the state power and the people take part in the government directly or through their representatives.
Forms of Democracy
There are two types of democracy: (1) Pure or Direct, and (2) Indirect or Representative.
Direct Democracy: When the people themselves directly express their will on public affairs, the type of government is called pure or direct democracy. The people formulate laws in a mass meeting. Direct Democracy was established in ancient Greek city-states. In India, direct democracy was seen in Vajji Sangha during the Buddhist xriods. Today when large and complex societies have emerged and when area of the State is very extensive, direct democracy is impracticable. This system now prevails only four cantons of Switzerland. They are Appenzell, Unterwalden and Glarus.
Representative or Indirect Democracy: In a Representative or Indirect Democracy the will of the state is formulated and expressed not directly by the people themselves, but by their representatives to whom they delegate the power deliberation and decision-making.
This type of government was established in England in the seventeenth century. In France, it was established in 1830 and in Italy in 1948. In Germany it was established after the First World War according to Weimer Constitution. Again this system was established in West Germany after the Second World War. In India direct democracy was introduced in the Minto-Morley Reforms of 1909. Today this system is seen in many countries like Japan, Sri Lanka, India, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United States of America, West Germany, Italy, France, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Austria and Belgium.
Basic Principles or Requisites of Democracy:
Basic Principle of Democracy are as follows;
Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, The people as ultimate source of sovereignty, Fundamental rights to the people, Independence of Judiciary, The people are considered as an end and State as the means in a democracy, Welfare State
Conditions for the success of Democracy;
To make the democracy a success in any country, the following conditions should be fulfilled:
Sound System of Education, Enlightened Citizenship, Political Awakening, Freedom, Equality, Law and Order, Spirit of Co-operation, Decentralization of Powers and Local self-government, High Moral Standard, Social and economic Security, Tolerance and Spirit of Unity, Sound Party System, Written Constitution and Independent Judiciary, Independent, impartial and periodical elections, Political security, good administration, economic prosperity and wise leadership
Democracy in Bangladesh: An Overview;
Bangladesh, is becoming middle income country, has a twin challenge to face: institutionalization of a democratic order and at the same time attains a target rate of economic growth for development. So democracy and economic development has to develop in parallel. The level of poverty, illiteracy, starvation, disease and malnutrition that prevails among nearly eighty percent of the population certainly does not make it easy for any country or government to undertake such a challenge. Since independence in 1971, democracy has been in crisis in Bangladesh. The country was born out of a long democratic movement initially aimed at achieving autonomy for the rights of the majority population of Pakistan. Towards the end of this movement almost the entire population of Bangladesh was drawn in an armed struggle to establish their rights of self-determination as guaranteed in the charter of the United Nations. The cherished goal of democratic rights of the people were enshrined in the constitution of the country in 1972 but in less than two years after the first parliament was elected, the structure and character of the fundamental law of the land was changed and the country’s political system was turned into a one-party monolithic structure. All political parties were dissolved and all newspapers were band except four to be retained by the state; the fundamental rights were suspended and made non-enforceable and the judiciary was reduced into a subservient agency of the executive branch of the state (Ahmed, 1994)
The crisis of democracy deepened further with successive army interventions when military leaders (Zia & Ershad) and again in 2007 Bangladesh emerged from a period of rule by a military-backed caretaker government ruled the country.
During all these years various social, economical and political forces have operated and influenced the course of democracy in Bangladesh. Not only did the leaders, both civil and military, create a crisis of democracy but they had aggravated it by trying to shape the laws and events to suit their own designs, disregarding the urgent need for development of democratic institutions and failing to provide the commitment required for accelerating the economic growth. During the long term (1976-1990) of military rule the institutions which have been mostly damaged but which are considered as the pivotal force for developing constitutionalism is the party system in the country. Since the political activities were banned repeatedly, the strength and cohesion within the most famous parties was destroyed. On the one hand, mashroom growth political parties devoid of any ideology or program were created by money power just to give a democratic poster to the election of the military ruler. Finally, however, the Ershad regime was toppled by a popular man-movement in December 1990 when the military withdrew its support (Halim, 1998).
Thus in 1990 the country was freed from the clutches of military rule and the peoples’ sustained struggle for democracy has at last triumphed with autocrat president Ershad and the time came to lead the nation on a new journey in search of constitutionalism and democracy. The second start of constitutionalism had its democratic and peaceful transit through the historic 5th parliamentary election under the Acting President Justice Sahabuddin Ahmed. 1991, by the 12th Amendment of the constitution government was reverted again to parliamentary form after 16 years. The starting of the second parliamentary democracy seemed fine and enthusiastic but lastly the celebrated 5th parliament also like every other previous parliament in the country could not complete its constitutional duration; it was to dissolve under the pressure of the opposition movements. The ruling party BNP has, in many was, and failed to make a positive turn towards the development of constitutionalism and democracy.
The case of 5th parliament, the major opposition party Awami League (AL) was not given adequate time in parliamentary deliberation and as a result they boycotted the parliament. The ruling elite did not show much tolerance as was necessary for bringing the opposition into parliament and they forcefully run the parliament as long as two years without the opposition i.e. ignoring the opposition. Lastly the BNP government denied to hold the 6th parliamentary election ignoring the opposition and it proceeded to contest the election with some sudden hand-picked parties as the military dictator Ershad frequently did. This was a flagrant wrong done by a democratically elected government and this showed the ruling elite’s lock of political foresight. This is why the 6th parliament had only 7 days life. This negative trend in parliamentary democracy i.e. the trend of political intolerance done by the BNP government has proved the crisis of constructive leadership in the development of constitutionalism in Bangladesh (Halim, 1998). Later, the 7th parliamentary election was held under the neutral Caretaker Government with some hopes and aspiration and the majority voted for the AL. The new government of Al (1996) also practiced like the before BNP govt. without opposition participation. For example: ordinance making power is being used in the same way, policies concerning national interests or economy e.g. making water treaty, making CHT agreement declaring two days public weekly holidays, declaring 30% quota in public services for freedom fighters’ families etc. have been declared in public gatherings and press avoiding the parliament; sessions of parliaments are being held for a very shorter period; the opposition BNP is boycotting the parliament and Sheikh Hasina, the Prime Minister, is Just provoking this opposition trend. Thus the trend is still in the negative direction, the parliament, as the most important institution of democracy still remains a mere Cinderella body. The important mass media like radio, T.V. are being used as government mouthpieces; the lower judiciary is still depended on the executive though the government is repeatedly promising to take steps to separate judiciary from the executive. But it has not been implemented even today. After completing the term 5 years, the 8th parliamentary election was held under the caretaker government of Justice Latifur Rahman on October 1, 2001. And the BNP formed the qualision government. After formation of government they try to exercise democratic. culture but the path is not moisturized.
The current leader of the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), Khaleda Zia, was prime minister until she stepped down in October 2006. The prime minister is normally supposed to step down and transfer power to a caretaker government for a short time period immediately preceding elections. Political violence in the lead-up to the scheduled January 2007 election led the caretaker government to declare a state of emergency and extend its rule until the December 2008 elections were held.
In 2009, Bangladesh emerged from a period of rule by a military-backed caretaker government through a December 29, 2008, election that gave Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of the Awami League (AL) a very strong electoral mandate. The AL government is expected to serve its full term, as it has 230 of 299 seats in parliament. Due to its strong victory, the AL has the necessary two-thirds majority needed to amend the constitution and is able to rule without coalition partners. After formation of government they try to exercise democratic. culture but the path is not moisturized till now.
On 5 January, 2014 ruling party AL arranged a election but opposition party boycott the election on demand of caretaker government. This election about 154 MPs were elected without competition. A recent survey, conducted by a government-leaning leading newspaper, has revealed that around 90% of the people want the forthcoming parliamentary election to be held under the non-party caretaker government.
On 5 January, the first anniversary of the deeply contested 2014 elections, the most violent in Bangladesh’s history, clashes between government and opposition groups led to several deaths and scores injured. The confrontation marks a new phase of the deadlock between the ruling Awami League (AL) and the Bangladesh National Party (BNP) opposition, which have swapped time in government with metronomic consistency since independence. BNP called countrywide strike on 99 days, at strike above 80 death tolls on burnt through petrol bomb and 47 were counter death through police.
Present features of Bangladesh Democracy;
The present status of democracy in Bangladesh has discussed by the following features;
Political Crisis;
A serious political crisis is looming in Bangladesh which may take the country into a disaster. Political, democratic and basic constitutional rights of the political parties are being denied. Senior political leaders are routinely arrested and put behind the bar on flimsy grounds. Doors of the central office of the main opposition party, which had run the country at least three times in the past, were broken by the police with hammers. Opposition party workers and leaders are held on remand for weeks (and in some cases for months) without due process being followed, where they are harassed and inhumanely tortured. A recent survey, conducted by a government-leaning leading newspaper, has revealed that around 90% of the people want the forthcoming parliamentary election to be held under the non-party caretaker government. Yet the government is arrogantly determined to hold the election under their party government. The provision of the non-party caretaker government was in the Constitution. But the government disregarding overwhelming majority views of the people, civil society and legal experts unilaterally repealed it couple years ago.
Police, and law and order;
The primary duty of the police is to maintain and control law and order within the country. To do that the police must apply the law equally to all. This is the constitutional mandate (Article 27 of the Constitution). Unfortunately, the police in Bangladesh have been acting as political cadres of the governing party. They are behaving in an apparent discriminating way and applying the law with utmost partiality. The government party workers and leaders appear to be above the law, whereas the opposition party workers and leaders seem to be the victims and targets of all actions and atrocities of the police force. This is totally against the principle of non-discrimination ensured by Article 28(1) of the Constitution. The recent attitudes, behaviors and actions of the police force clearly suggest that the primary duty of the police has changed in Bangladesh. When dealing with opposition activists and leaders in respect of arresting them and holding them on remand.
The Economy;
The economic condition of the country is very volatile. The widespread corruption, nepotism, mismanagement and political influences have almost collapsed the public banking sector. In a much publicised scandal at a branch of one of the state owned banks involved nearly four thousand crore taka and high up government officials - including an influential Advisor to the government and political appointees at the bank's Board - are evidently believed to be involved with this large scale scandal. To run the country, the government has already taken loan from the banks at unprecedented level. The evident corruption in the Padma Bridge project of the government at the highest level has led the World Bank to withdraw its funding from the project. Following the Word Bank, the other foreign creditors like the JIKA have withdrawn their funding from the project as well. The inflation is in double digit, resulting in the prices of the goods going beyond the capacity of the ordinary people to pay. Foreign remittances from expatriate Bangladeshis have been decreasing. The foreign investments have significantly declined. The unemployment rate is the highest level in the 42 years history of independent Bangladesh, with nearly three crore unemployed youths.
Media;
Almost all media in Bangladesh are biased - they appear to be in the government's side. They are keeping their blind eyes on what has exactly been happening. Most of their reporting is either one sided or false or concocted. As a result, true condition and circumstances are aired in the media. These are making the matters worse. The time of describing this merely as 'yellow journalism' has probably gone, at least in Bangladesh. In fact, what most of the media are doing in Bangladesh can now be called 'media terrorism.' A few print and electronic media have been making objective reports with bravery and professionalism which have gone against the governments. But the government has closed down those media without following due process. The social media and international media are now the only sources to get objective information on what has exactly been happening in Bangladesh.
Civil Society;
A vibrant civil society is vital for democracy. Unfortunately, civil society in Bangladesh appears to be one eyed, partial and one sided. They seem to cause storm in a tea cup in relatively minor incidents and matters, but they keep surprisingly quite on major incidents and matters, the discussion and criticism of which are perceived to go against the government. For example, members of the civil society were seen vocal against some minor Islamic issues, such as an isolated beating for adultery and compulsory to wear hijab for Muslim girls in an Islamic school etc, but they appear to be relatively silent on corruption over Padma Bridge, the Hall Mark scandal involving nearly four thousand crore taka, defaming Islam and its prophet, the Savar Rana Plaza tragedy which cost thousands of human lives, Shapla Chattar massacre costing hundreds of human lives etc. In these major incidents involving corruption and scandal, the government is believed to be directly or indirectly involved and responsible for what has gone on. Civil society in Bangladesh appears to be dominant by left and the secularists. The current government consists of an alliance of left and secularist political parties. This is probably why the civil society is surprisingly silent on various major issues, for they probably do not want to upset the government which shares their ideology!
Judiciary;
Trusting the judiciary is the last resort of the ordinary people of any country. Unfortunately, the whole judiciary in Bangladesh has been politicised. The Transparency International (TI) identified the judiciary as one of the most corrupted areas in the country couple of years ago. The executive has direct control over promotion and transfer in the lower judiciary. The Judges in the lower judiciary cannot function independently and impartially. Granting and refusing bail and remand are done through indirect and hidden instructions of the government. Non-loyal and non-obeying Magistrates and Judges are transferred to remote areas of Bangladesh as a punishment.
The apex judiciary was said to be comparatively impartial and independent in the past. This is no longer the case. Appointing Judges in the High Court based on political consideration has now become the norms. Nearly sixty Judges have been appointed in the High Court since the current government came into office. The overwhelming majority of them were appointed not based on merit and skills, but rather based on political consideration, whose relatives they were and whose junior they were! This is not only happening in the High Court, the same atmosphere is seen in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court as well...
........................................(under construction)
