Change in political mindset for better economic governance
Friday, 29 October 2010
Amir Khan
The developments in the political sphere, following the transition afresh to an elected and representative government, continue to be keenly watched by all sections of people. They have been observing what steps the political parties, particularly their leaders, take in the backdrop of their experiences for two years under the erstwhile caretaker government and in line with people's aspirations.
People have been interested to know whether the parties have gone through any changes in their mindsets, whether there are genuinely any drivers in them for their inner democratisation or reforms and whether the reformists are getting a good hearing from their party workers at large. It seems not. For both the major political parties held their long overdue council sessions after the elections in December, 2008 to consider issues of the greatest importance to them. It was thought that the desire for democratisation and reforms of the parties would be ascendant at such events. But such hopes were largely not met in the council sessions of both parties. In fact, the reformist quarters or voices have been muted.
But how can such developments be welcomed in the interest of democracy and good governance in Bangladesh? Again and again, it has been proved that the greatest misfortune of Bangladesh is its inability to usher in real democracy to be characterised by the political parties cleaning their own stables to allow for upward movement to leadership positions in them by individual possessing true merit, high qualities of leadership and integrity of character. Such a process, again ought not to be affected by any undemocratic ambitions or claims of any other pedigree and cult.
There are also many other issues to be addressed in the political system such as the mindless abstention from parliament, calling economy-detrimental hartals, the lack of a bipartisan approach to vital or core national issues, etc. But it is an unsavoury aspect of the country's polity that its real players are yet to mature to a state to take really dedicated inclusive measure for the solid establishment of these values or norms in the political system.
As it is some political observers have described all governments since the fall of the so-called autocratic regime towards the end of the eighties as nothing but 'elected political coterie'. In all fairness, such statements must not be taken lightly.
The glass remains possibly only one half of it full and the rest empty. Bangladesh -- today -- has now undeniably a democratic polity. But that is more in form than in content. Its real democratic journey remains far from complete. This is the biggest challenge before it. For what it means to have a real democratic system, our leaders only have to look at recent examples in other truly functioning democracies.
In UK, Tony Blair, a towering figure in the ruling Labour Party, was the Prime Minister. But his own party colleagues did not hesitate to elect a new leader when they considered it necessary. The same is the case with his successor, George Brown, following the defeat of the British Labour Party in the last general election. Can we think of such things happening in our major political parties in their present settings? The answer should be obvious.
Meanwhile, the immediate past caretaker government in Bangladesh is now being criticized, not unfairly, for many of its transparent failures: the inability to conduct the anti-corruption campaign neatly and effectively, for excesses committed against individuals violating their fundamental rights while carrying out the drive against corruption, it failure to live up to its tall promises to cleanse the vital state institutions, etc. But that government, undoubtedly, had earlier sought to lift people's expectations to a very high degree.
Thus, the expectations created by the caretakers when they took over that they would work for a new beginning in the country's life, particularly its political life, did initially receive some enthusiastic support in different quarters. This was particularly because the realization was then strong at various levels of society in Bangladesh that the country's political system needed deep-seated reforms and a complete revival in the positive sense.
However, the activities of the caretakers disillusioned the people in the longer run. But this disillusionment about the caretakers does in no way mean approval either of the old order practised by the political parties so far. On their part, people remain eager, as always, that the political culture in Bangladesh must change because the politicians are at the helm in steering the country. Until the politicians brace themselves for the much-needed reforms and embrace the change for this purpose, the governance of the country, specially economic governance, is unlikely to change for the better.
The developments in the political sphere, following the transition afresh to an elected and representative government, continue to be keenly watched by all sections of people. They have been observing what steps the political parties, particularly their leaders, take in the backdrop of their experiences for two years under the erstwhile caretaker government and in line with people's aspirations.
People have been interested to know whether the parties have gone through any changes in their mindsets, whether there are genuinely any drivers in them for their inner democratisation or reforms and whether the reformists are getting a good hearing from their party workers at large. It seems not. For both the major political parties held their long overdue council sessions after the elections in December, 2008 to consider issues of the greatest importance to them. It was thought that the desire for democratisation and reforms of the parties would be ascendant at such events. But such hopes were largely not met in the council sessions of both parties. In fact, the reformist quarters or voices have been muted.
But how can such developments be welcomed in the interest of democracy and good governance in Bangladesh? Again and again, it has been proved that the greatest misfortune of Bangladesh is its inability to usher in real democracy to be characterised by the political parties cleaning their own stables to allow for upward movement to leadership positions in them by individual possessing true merit, high qualities of leadership and integrity of character. Such a process, again ought not to be affected by any undemocratic ambitions or claims of any other pedigree and cult.
There are also many other issues to be addressed in the political system such as the mindless abstention from parliament, calling economy-detrimental hartals, the lack of a bipartisan approach to vital or core national issues, etc. But it is an unsavoury aspect of the country's polity that its real players are yet to mature to a state to take really dedicated inclusive measure for the solid establishment of these values or norms in the political system.
As it is some political observers have described all governments since the fall of the so-called autocratic regime towards the end of the eighties as nothing but 'elected political coterie'. In all fairness, such statements must not be taken lightly.
The glass remains possibly only one half of it full and the rest empty. Bangladesh -- today -- has now undeniably a democratic polity. But that is more in form than in content. Its real democratic journey remains far from complete. This is the biggest challenge before it. For what it means to have a real democratic system, our leaders only have to look at recent examples in other truly functioning democracies.
In UK, Tony Blair, a towering figure in the ruling Labour Party, was the Prime Minister. But his own party colleagues did not hesitate to elect a new leader when they considered it necessary. The same is the case with his successor, George Brown, following the defeat of the British Labour Party in the last general election. Can we think of such things happening in our major political parties in their present settings? The answer should be obvious.
Meanwhile, the immediate past caretaker government in Bangladesh is now being criticized, not unfairly, for many of its transparent failures: the inability to conduct the anti-corruption campaign neatly and effectively, for excesses committed against individuals violating their fundamental rights while carrying out the drive against corruption, it failure to live up to its tall promises to cleanse the vital state institutions, etc. But that government, undoubtedly, had earlier sought to lift people's expectations to a very high degree.
Thus, the expectations created by the caretakers when they took over that they would work for a new beginning in the country's life, particularly its political life, did initially receive some enthusiastic support in different quarters. This was particularly because the realization was then strong at various levels of society in Bangladesh that the country's political system needed deep-seated reforms and a complete revival in the positive sense.
However, the activities of the caretakers disillusioned the people in the longer run. But this disillusionment about the caretakers does in no way mean approval either of the old order practised by the political parties so far. On their part, people remain eager, as always, that the political culture in Bangladesh must change because the politicians are at the helm in steering the country. Until the politicians brace themselves for the much-needed reforms and embrace the change for this purpose, the governance of the country, specially economic governance, is unlikely to change for the better.