Post-1/11 Caretaker Government and its challenges
by Imtiaz Ahmed - Courtesy New Age 4/2/08
The post-1/11 caretaker government is beset with manifold challenges, most of which have come about from the inaction or misdeeds of the previous governments but then there are some which are its own making. In meeting these challenges either partially or in full rests the case of total or partial success and as the case may be total or partial failure on the part of the government. I prefer to call the first cluster of challenges as political.
Several key areas could be found in this category where reforms brought about by the government had a fairly positive impact. First is the Election Commission. This institution was salvaged from a state of disrepute, mainly by appointing individuals who are more professional and seemingly non-partisan. But the challenge with the commission is yet to go, and this is related to the task of transforming the commission from a functionally governmental institution to a functionally state institution, with an independent secretariat and the capacity to function independently. In this context, it already tainted itself by choosing one faction of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party over another in the phase of dialoguing with the political parties and now the matter rests with the court. A more professional option would have been to request for a court verdict before opting for one or invite both the factions and let the factions themselves sort out their differences over the EC-imposed electoral reforms.
Second is the voter ID. This was a public demand and also the demand of the opposition parties. This task is progressing well and the caretaker government along with the military, which is actually implementing the work, ought to be praised for the progress thus far made and it now looks that by July this year the task would be fully done. The challenge facing this task has now come down to the issue as to how it would work on the day of the election. There is now an opinion that before the national election, which is due by the end of this year, the voter ID be pre-tested in local or municipal elections. At the same time the commission ought to have a website to inform the public on a weekly basis the progress thus far made in registering the voters.
Third is the separation of the judiciary from the executive. The work on this issue started almost a decade earlier but the previous governments kept on delaying the process of actually separating the judiciary from the executive. ‘Separation’, however, does not guarantee the immediate ‘independence’ of the judiciary, the task of which requires a creative combination of time and judicial-cum-organisational skills. The caretaker government would do well to encourage civil watch bodies to monitor the progress, including inviting critical reviews and suggestions of how best to expedite the process.
Fourth is the Public Service Commission, where replacing the erstwhile partisan commissioners with the seemingly non-partisan professionals have made the institution more credible in the eyes of the public. But then like the Election Commission the independence of the Public Service Commission is yet to be ensured, and only by changing the rule of business, particularly relating to the appointments of the commissioners and other recruitments, could we expect it to be functionally independent and become a state institution in reality.
Finally, and a much-talked-about achievement in this category, is the Anti-Corruption Commission. Here too the replacement of partisan commissioners with more financially clean, non-partisan individuals and, indeed, with the full backing of the military, has made the institution more credible in the eyes of the public and thus far has succeeded in at least making an impact in carrying out its institutional mandate. But then the impact has largely remained limited to the task of bringing allegations of corruption against the ‘larger than life’ politicians and businesspersons, and with few exceptions, without successfully prosecuting them in courts on the basis of judicially credible evidence. However, I must quickly point out that the commission is confident of the evidence of corruption it has in its hands but this is something that needs to be watched very closely.
Some critics, however, question as to why the drive against corruption is so relentless and aggressive when other developed countries, including the United States or Singapore, had phases of corruption in their respective developmental history? One quick answer would be that in developed countries the corrupt reinvested their ill-gotten money in their own land, while in our case the corrupt spent mostly in foreign luxury goods or spurious activities or hoarded in banks beyond borders. The governmental drive against corruption, however, had a negative impact on the economy, the discussion of which I will take up shortly.
The area in which the caretaker government had the least success up until now is impressing upon the political parties to undertake internal reforms, indeed, with the objective of substantially democratising the party. The government is partly to be blamed for it. This includes policies ranging from the so-called minus-two formula to the non-withdrawal of the state of emergency or making it less flexible. At times comments by some advisers have made the task even more difficult, although the government has recently rectified this by firing four advisers and quickly replacing them with newer ones. What is required here is space in which the political parties could activate a form of collective leadership and replace the age-old structure of having an-all powerful leader with almost dictatorial power. Lesser is the time given to collective leadership to start and settle down the greater is the risk of having the older structure survive and create a dent in the political agenda of the government. Keeping this issue in perspective, it is imperative that the state of emergency be either withdrawn or its rules made more flexible so that the political parties could enjoy the required space to congregate, codify and practice internal democratic party reforms. Here both time and space are the essence of the matter.
This brings us to the second cluster of challenges which could be called economic. I have already mentioned about the governmental drive against corruption and the negative impact it had on the economy. This was somewhat inevitable, although it now seems that the government did not foresee such a situation. The TIB (Transparency International, Bangladesh) had consistently pointed out the extent of corruption and the unholy alliance between the big business and the politicians. The fact, however, remains that the government did not prepare itself in facing the issue of an economic stalemate and in certain areas indeed a decline resulting from the policy of incarcerating the corrupt politicians and businesspersons or what could be referred to as the aggressive policing of the business-politician nexus. I will have more to say about this shortly.
Three other challenges complicated the dismal state of economy even further. One is the global impact of oil price hike to nearly $100 per barrel, particularly in making the price of rice and other food items costlier. Second is the mid-level flood in the middle of the year. And third is the devastating impact of cyclone Sidr, which also saw the much-needed aman crop getting washed away completely. All these have contributed to a situation where the common people are finding their purchasing power drastically curtailed within weeks if not days and are increasingly losing trust on the government in facing the economic problem.
Some reports indicate that 8 per cent of the business houses import 80 per cent of the goods. If this is the case and in the backdrop of some of the members of the big business getting incarcerated or getting hunted down then it is quite obvious that such houses would be reluctant to pursue business and instead would look for a long holiday at home or abroad, and also would lend support to forces working for a quick demise of the government. Since the big business has laundered money abroad, there is also the reason to believe that they have a good number of international friends to help them out in their time of distress. Moreover, the hardship of the common masses could create grounds for a moral campaign against the government, indeed, under the leadership of the so-called left or progressive forces, which the forces comfortable with pre-1/11 setting could now find convenient to join only to transform the campaign to its benefit.
How to re-energise the economy then? Although somewhat late, the caretaker government has realised that the enemies within and abroad are formidable enough for stalling not only the economy but also derailing the process of democratisation and good governance, including the political roadmap of having the parliamentary elections before the deadline of December 2008. The government could certainly gear up its efforts towards restoring confidence in the minds and activities of the entrepreneurs, both foreign and local, by undertaking the following task:
One, emphasis ought to be given more to the task of changing the structure reproducing corruption than on the policing and incarceration of the individuals. Not that the latter is not required, only that without changing the structure the impact of the latter would remain temporary and cosmetic.
Two, space ought to be created for the law abiding businesspersons to invest in big business. This ought to include even financial incentives to the fresh ones.
Three, make the electronic and print media a partner to its goal of re-energising the economy. This could only come about by way of ensuring a free media devoid of the restrictions imposed under the state of emergency and other governmental regulations. Licensing of community radio, indeed, of all kinds ought to be made a priority in this context.
Four, making business rules more transparent to the prospective investors both at home and abroad and doing away with the bureaucratic hurdles. Independent watchdogs ought to be established to see whether or not someone is deliberately slowing down the process of business communication and licensing.
Finally, creating new business and employment opportunities by way of aggressively engaging with private investors, both foreign and local, including the members of the Bangladeshi diaspora. Here too independent watchdogs ought to be established to make the process transparent and ensuring an environment of pro-people investments.
The last cluster of challenges facing the caretaker government could be called social. The government has made some success in containing the religion-centred terrorism, namely the violent activities of Jamaatul Mujahideen Bangladesh, by hanging six of its key leaders. This should not be taken to mean, however, that the issue of religion-centred terrorism is over. Instead the fear is now that those who have suffered politically and/or financially in the wake of 1/11 may now be tempted to make an alliance with the religion-centred extremists and create havoc in the country. The task in this context is threefold and the caretaker government has focused only on one or two.
First, incarcerating the militants, in which the government has had some success.
Second, raising the level of intelligence, and this is still inadequate. This is mainly because the government is yet to come up with a structure of combining traditional security networks with the agencies of civil society, including the academia and research institutes. This certainly calls for a newer structure of intelligence, one which would be able to contain the contemporary forms of post-globalisation non-state terrorism.
Finally, the intellectual task of containing the religion-centred ideas bordering on intolerance and rigidities or what has come to be known as the Wahhabisation of Islam. The caretaker government is yet to undertake a task on this, and this allows for intolerant followers to prosper and continue their activities. The Election Commission can certainly play a critical role in this by making it clear that no political party would be given registration and allowed to sit for elections if discriminatory provisions like limiting the leadership to only male members or keeping the party membership to only one linguistic or religious community are found codified in the party constitution or otherwise practiced. In this light, it would only be prudent for the government to at least start the process of identifying the war criminals and those responsible for the 1971 genocide. A step in this direction would certainly rescue the peaceful religion of Islam from the seemingly empowered hands of intolerant and, if I may add, distorted followers. In this age of globalisation this is as much a global task as it is a national one.
Interestingly, if all the clusters of challenges are put together, there arises yet another kind of challenge and that is, the public fear with respect to how much the caretaker government can deliver and more importantly, now that the election year is on, how much of its reforms can be sustained in post-election era. Critics with a sense of humour and a mindset of yesteryears probably will refer to this as a desperate search for an ‘exit strategy’ of the military-backed government but that is not what I have in mind.
Two quick points are noteworthy even then. Firstly, save the first few years of independence, all the previous government, whether popularly elected or not, had an active backing of the military and that included the latter’s alleged periodic ‘inaction’ as well. Secondly, following the 1991 popular upsurge, the ‘exit’ was limited to a military person in the name of Ershad and not the military as an institution. And now, given the experience of having two subsequent caretaker governments, with the military remaining ‘inactive’ and ‘active’ in the first and second caretaker government respectively, there is no reason to believe that the public fear would vanish the moment the election is held and the military demonstrably goes back to the barracks. This calls for the establishment of a public or national security council, with an overwhelming civil content and a structure where the position and the opposition would have no recourse but to meet and work together and keep the ills of pre-1/11 era at bay. A creative combination of political insight, long-term vision and a passion for democracy and democratisation is what is required to have it institutionalised and make it acceptable to the people.
But then ‘public fear’ is neither linear nor does it seek state protection all the time. Indeed, if there is any setback or derailing of the democratic process, including the announced roadmap of parliamentary elections, the public could start fearing the caretaker government itself, and there lies the greatest challenge! In fact, the history of Bangladesh has repeatedly shown that once the public starts feeling betrayed there is a quick turn of events, from a state of public fear to a state of public fearlessness! But this is a prescription for suicide, not so much of the nation as it is of the caretaker government.
Challenges are enormous and I would expect the caretaker government to work on some of these in the remaining nine or ten months without creating newer ones from ill-designed or half-hearted policies. And once the challenges are met it would certainly go a long way in restoring confidence amongst the people and those seeking to contribute to democracy and democratization of the country. The post-1/11 caretaker government can then rest its case and claim a place in history.
__._,_.___
[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com 
__,_._,___
