The military-controlled interim government of Fakhruddin Ahmed took over from the discredited 'caretaker administration' of President Iajuddin Ahmed under a state of emergency almost a year back with the self-professed objective of helping the country overcome the political crisis prevailing then, upholding and consolidating 'the democratic system through ensuring a congenial political and social environment, holding a free and fair election and ensuring the people's voting rights.' In reality, however, the government has seemingly done just the opposite. It has induced a climate of fear in social and political milieu, which has predictably had a debilitating impact on the economy; overstepped the constitutional boundary vis-à-vis its mandate and jurisdiction, which has raised questions about its constitutional legitimacy; and created further political uncertainty by trying, so far unsuccessfully, to redraw the political landscape through its so-called 'minus-two formula.' Overall, the government seems to have compounded the crisis rather than resolving it.
The resignation of four advisers on Tuesday is the latest in the series of crises that the interim government seems to have created for itself and the country. What prompted the four advisers to resign is not clear and the government has not yet come up with any clarification other than the press secretary to the chief adviser telling journalists on Tuesday that they had resigned on personal grounds. Meanwhile, there have been reports that the four advisers were called in to the Chief Adviser's Officer and asked to resign. If the four advisers did resign on personal grounds, it could be an indication that they did not agree with either the mandate or the programmes of the interim government as they stand now. On the other hand, if they were asked to resign, it could be construed as an indirect admission by the interim government and its military backers that these four had put the incumbents into disrepute and caused erosion of its public acceptability. Should that be the case, it should be pointed out that the council of advisers is collectively responsible for whatever the government does or does not do, and that the country has further sunken into crisis because of its collective lack of political understanding of the statecraft. Making one adviser or the other scapegoat for its collective failure would not help in any way to resolve the crisis.
The interim government must realise that the current crisis is political and has to be resolved politically. Therefore, the most prudent step for it to take would be to engage in talks with the political parties to reach consensus on how best to return the country to a democratic fold, to be governed by the people's elected representatives. Simply put, the incumbents should consult with the political establishments to devise ways and means to complete the task it is assigned by the constitution, i.e. assisting the Election Commission to hold contested and credible general elections.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___