Constitution is not a document of expediency
Tuesday, 22 June 2010
Shamsher Chowdhury
Constitution of a country is its most sacred document. Therefore, extreme care should be taken so that no one uses or abuses it in order to gain mileage politically or otherwise. Constitution is for all people of the country. It is like the trust of the entire nation. But as pointed out by some of the seniormost legal experts it is being dragged into politics once too often. We do not know of any other democratic country of the world where politicians and rulers of the country have used their constitution as randomly as it is done here. Even the largest democracy of the world, our neighbour hardly brings in the constitution in their day to day political maneuverings. Politics in India is no less volatile than it is here. Yet it is evident that it seldom meddles with its constitution. This writer is neither a legal expert nor a politician. But what we are observing here is that neither the ruling party nor the opposition is playing by the rules of the game.
Coming to specifics, take this most recent incident where the leader of the opposition's remarks on the forthcoming budget being described by senior members of the ruling party as "Unconstitutional". As we said before we are no expert on the constitution but it is our belief that neither the ruling party nor the opposition understands the underlying spirit of a constitution. To the best of our knowledge in a democracy you can criticise the government both within and outside the Parliament. To that extent the ruling party's claim that the leader of the opposition's recent remarks on the budget as constitutional, is untenable.
As we have indicated earlier, the onus is on the ruling party to be more tolerant of opposing views both of the opposition and dissidents in general. One also gets the feeling that slowly and surely the ruling party is loosing its grip on common sense, logic and rationality in its management practices. Anger and arrogance are the two most dangerous elements that stand in the way of smooth functioning of democracy and democratic practices. May we ask the ruling party as to whether or not it has upheld the dictates and the sprit of the constitution in all its management interventions? Constitution or no constitution we are yet to see the reflection of true democracy in any of its workings. How can democracy flourish when the two major parties are not democratic in the in-house management of their respective parties? We have never come across any democratic state where there is so much talk of democracy and yet so little of it in practice as it is here.
It has been our impression that the very defenders of the constitution have either ignored or violated its sacred provisions in more ways than one. Have our freedom of speech and right to information been ensured or achieved? Is the judiciary truly independent and even handed? What about the spread of human rights violations? Has there been any sincere attempt in addressing the issue with a degree of sincerity? On the contrary, much time is spent in hiding and denying the very presence of it. . .
The four principal pillars of our constitution are: Nationalism (Jatiyotabad), Secularism (Dharmaniro-pekkhota), Democracy (gonotantatra) and Socialism in the sense of economic justice (Shamajtantra), reads well and sound well. But can one tell us frankly as to how much reflection of that we see in our living and lifestyles. Indeed ever so little.
How many of us are nationalists in the truest sense of the term? Being a nationalist is being a patriot. With no reflection to any particular party or parties or individuals it is our impression that we do have a serious death of people in that category.
Coming to the question of secularism, not everything is right there too. To this day we have not been fair and even handed in our treatment of people belonging to different religions and religious beliefs. We often hear about Bangladesh being a moderate Muslim country. Can one explain as to whatever does that mean? We have seen how the vested property act continues to be used and abused to grab "property" of the minorities. On the other hand, every effort is on, in community profiling of Muslims in general. Sometime back there was a news report which essentially said that some quarters are concerned about the rising number of people going to the mosques with toupees and with beards and that this development or phenomenon should be closely watched. This is exactly the way the superpower is playing with the dignity and honour of most of the Muslims living all over the world.
Last but not least in importance is this matter of socialism in the sense of economic justice. Do we have a society that is based on socialistic principles whereby the common man also has a share in the production and distribution of country's resources? Frankly the common man has no say whatsoever in the management of either the state or its resources.
Therefore if we are unable to abide by the spirit of the constitution we have simply no right to use or abuse it directly or indirectly either.
The writer can be reached at
e-mail:
chowdhury.shamsher@yahoo.com
Constitution of a country is its most sacred document. Therefore, extreme care should be taken so that no one uses or abuses it in order to gain mileage politically or otherwise. Constitution is for all people of the country. It is like the trust of the entire nation. But as pointed out by some of the seniormost legal experts it is being dragged into politics once too often. We do not know of any other democratic country of the world where politicians and rulers of the country have used their constitution as randomly as it is done here. Even the largest democracy of the world, our neighbour hardly brings in the constitution in their day to day political maneuverings. Politics in India is no less volatile than it is here. Yet it is evident that it seldom meddles with its constitution. This writer is neither a legal expert nor a politician. But what we are observing here is that neither the ruling party nor the opposition is playing by the rules of the game.
Coming to specifics, take this most recent incident where the leader of the opposition's remarks on the forthcoming budget being described by senior members of the ruling party as "Unconstitutional". As we said before we are no expert on the constitution but it is our belief that neither the ruling party nor the opposition understands the underlying spirit of a constitution. To the best of our knowledge in a democracy you can criticise the government both within and outside the Parliament. To that extent the ruling party's claim that the leader of the opposition's recent remarks on the budget as constitutional, is untenable.
As we have indicated earlier, the onus is on the ruling party to be more tolerant of opposing views both of the opposition and dissidents in general. One also gets the feeling that slowly and surely the ruling party is loosing its grip on common sense, logic and rationality in its management practices. Anger and arrogance are the two most dangerous elements that stand in the way of smooth functioning of democracy and democratic practices. May we ask the ruling party as to whether or not it has upheld the dictates and the sprit of the constitution in all its management interventions? Constitution or no constitution we are yet to see the reflection of true democracy in any of its workings. How can democracy flourish when the two major parties are not democratic in the in-house management of their respective parties? We have never come across any democratic state where there is so much talk of democracy and yet so little of it in practice as it is here.
It has been our impression that the very defenders of the constitution have either ignored or violated its sacred provisions in more ways than one. Have our freedom of speech and right to information been ensured or achieved? Is the judiciary truly independent and even handed? What about the spread of human rights violations? Has there been any sincere attempt in addressing the issue with a degree of sincerity? On the contrary, much time is spent in hiding and denying the very presence of it. . .
The four principal pillars of our constitution are: Nationalism (Jatiyotabad), Secularism (Dharmaniro-pekkhota), Democracy (gonotantatra) and Socialism in the sense of economic justice (Shamajtantra), reads well and sound well. But can one tell us frankly as to how much reflection of that we see in our living and lifestyles. Indeed ever so little.
How many of us are nationalists in the truest sense of the term? Being a nationalist is being a patriot. With no reflection to any particular party or parties or individuals it is our impression that we do have a serious death of people in that category.
Coming to the question of secularism, not everything is right there too. To this day we have not been fair and even handed in our treatment of people belonging to different religions and religious beliefs. We often hear about Bangladesh being a moderate Muslim country. Can one explain as to whatever does that mean? We have seen how the vested property act continues to be used and abused to grab "property" of the minorities. On the other hand, every effort is on, in community profiling of Muslims in general. Sometime back there was a news report which essentially said that some quarters are concerned about the rising number of people going to the mosques with toupees and with beards and that this development or phenomenon should be closely watched. This is exactly the way the superpower is playing with the dignity and honour of most of the Muslims living all over the world.
Last but not least in importance is this matter of socialism in the sense of economic justice. Do we have a society that is based on socialistic principles whereby the common man also has a share in the production and distribution of country's resources? Frankly the common man has no say whatsoever in the management of either the state or its resources.
Therefore if we are unable to abide by the spirit of the constitution we have simply no right to use or abuse it directly or indirectly either.
The writer can be reached at
e-mail:
chowdhury.shamsher@yahoo.com