Looking beyond hartal as political strategy
Wednesday, 2 June 2010
Ferdous Rahman
Though the right to call a hartal - a particular form of protest used in Bangladesh and in other parts of South Asia - is viewed as a legitimate right, this right often impinges on the rights of individuals to earn a living and to go about their daily lives in peace and security. This raises an issue of conflict of competing rights. Historically, the hartal phenomenon has the roots in Gandhi's civil disobedience against colonialism. Earlier hartal used to be organised by volunteers without resort to violence. But now it is fear of violence by often paid goons of the political parties that keep people away from their occupation.
Hartals are often called in the name of the people, but it is the ordinary people whose movements are restricted, property endangered, and progress curbed. Hartal is apt to curtail the rights of people who are not willing to participate in it. In that sense, hartal is viewed by many as a coercive political right.
Hartal is no longer an effective form of protest. In a globalised economy with fierce competition for investment capital and jobs, no country can afford to have confrontational politics. Hartals associated with intimidation, coercion and infringement on other people's freedom of movement are not convincing or credible.
Hartal is not the solution of any problem and is economically damaging. Properties are damaged during hartals, work hour is lost and communication disrupted. The cumulative effect of any such losses cannot but be very alarming for the national economy and social order. Today nearly half of the 150 million people of the country live below poverty line though the economy has an impressive potential for pulling millions out of poverty. Political instability remains the key impediment to economic development in Bangladesh. With passage of time, the hope for political stability is becoming more illusory and people from all walks of life are losing confidence on the culture of hartal. It was widely expected that the new regime would bring political stability and end authoritarianism in all affairs of the state. But the reality has been quite different.
The main opposition party in the country, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), has called a countrywide dawn-to-dusk hartal for June 27, 2010 from the Paltan meeting on May 19. By announcing the hartal, the highly criticised hartal culture has been re-introduced in the country's political arena after a gap of three years. However, this will be the second hartal in the 16 months of the present government's term; the first half-day hartal was called by the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Ports on September 14 last year, which in fact was not observed.
Hartal is not a permanent solution regarding different civic problems faced by the people. Hartal damages the image of the country besides causing a huge loss to the economy. A UNDP report on hartal revealed that hartal had cost Bangladesh 3 to 4 per cent of its GDP on an average every year between 1991 to 2000. The business community, including the Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of Commerce and Industries (FBCCI) and the American Chamber of Commerce in Bangladesh (AmCham), has criticised the hartal call of the BNP.
In a developing country like Bangladesh, both the ruling party and the opposition would have to play effective roles in nation building. All should move away from the culture of hartal to other forms of protest and there should be more constructive dialogue through democratic channels. The idea of calling hartal should be given up as it obstructs economic development.
Promoting a more constructive role for the opposition in the parliament, and enabling greater freedom of expression through peaceful demonstrations and through the media could take away much of the impetus for hartals. The life of the 21st century needs 24/7 uninterrupted services.
The nation must not go back to the culture of hartal. We must avoid the prevalence of both authoritarianism and agitational politics.
(The writer is Coordinator, Media for Development. He can be reached at e-mail: ferdous.rahmaan@gmail.com)
Though the right to call a hartal - a particular form of protest used in Bangladesh and in other parts of South Asia - is viewed as a legitimate right, this right often impinges on the rights of individuals to earn a living and to go about their daily lives in peace and security. This raises an issue of conflict of competing rights. Historically, the hartal phenomenon has the roots in Gandhi's civil disobedience against colonialism. Earlier hartal used to be organised by volunteers without resort to violence. But now it is fear of violence by often paid goons of the political parties that keep people away from their occupation.
Hartals are often called in the name of the people, but it is the ordinary people whose movements are restricted, property endangered, and progress curbed. Hartal is apt to curtail the rights of people who are not willing to participate in it. In that sense, hartal is viewed by many as a coercive political right.
Hartal is no longer an effective form of protest. In a globalised economy with fierce competition for investment capital and jobs, no country can afford to have confrontational politics. Hartals associated with intimidation, coercion and infringement on other people's freedom of movement are not convincing or credible.
Hartal is not the solution of any problem and is economically damaging. Properties are damaged during hartals, work hour is lost and communication disrupted. The cumulative effect of any such losses cannot but be very alarming for the national economy and social order. Today nearly half of the 150 million people of the country live below poverty line though the economy has an impressive potential for pulling millions out of poverty. Political instability remains the key impediment to economic development in Bangladesh. With passage of time, the hope for political stability is becoming more illusory and people from all walks of life are losing confidence on the culture of hartal. It was widely expected that the new regime would bring political stability and end authoritarianism in all affairs of the state. But the reality has been quite different.
The main opposition party in the country, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), has called a countrywide dawn-to-dusk hartal for June 27, 2010 from the Paltan meeting on May 19. By announcing the hartal, the highly criticised hartal culture has been re-introduced in the country's political arena after a gap of three years. However, this will be the second hartal in the 16 months of the present government's term; the first half-day hartal was called by the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Ports on September 14 last year, which in fact was not observed.
Hartal is not a permanent solution regarding different civic problems faced by the people. Hartal damages the image of the country besides causing a huge loss to the economy. A UNDP report on hartal revealed that hartal had cost Bangladesh 3 to 4 per cent of its GDP on an average every year between 1991 to 2000. The business community, including the Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of Commerce and Industries (FBCCI) and the American Chamber of Commerce in Bangladesh (AmCham), has criticised the hartal call of the BNP.
In a developing country like Bangladesh, both the ruling party and the opposition would have to play effective roles in nation building. All should move away from the culture of hartal to other forms of protest and there should be more constructive dialogue through democratic channels. The idea of calling hartal should be given up as it obstructs economic development.
Promoting a more constructive role for the opposition in the parliament, and enabling greater freedom of expression through peaceful demonstrations and through the media could take away much of the impetus for hartals. The life of the 21st century needs 24/7 uninterrupted services.
The nation must not go back to the culture of hartal. We must avoid the prevalence of both authoritarianism and agitational politics.
(The writer is Coordinator, Media for Development. He can be reached at e-mail: ferdous.rahmaan@gmail.com)