Political intrusion, criminalisation affect social justice system
Tuesday, 3 May 2011
Md. Saidur Rahman
Putting aside their own merit and quality, the leaders of both the parties capitalise on the image of their respective party founders, and play mud-slinging at the other party people. As regards the failure of BNP in the Ninth Parliament election, the local leaders lamented over the excessive eulogy to party founder and less concern over meeting current needs of the people. One local BNP leader said, "How long will we only sell Ziaur Rahman (BNP founder)? We asked for a number of development activities, which the people demanded for a long time. In the locality, we need to build bridge, culvert, and build and maintain roads. The ministers become minister of their own areas, and forget the interest of the whole nation, and in a sense forget the long-term interest of the party." For candidate selection for the general election, the political parties have provision that the union committees will make a priority basis choice list of five candidates, which will gradually move to the district committees. The district committees will approve the choice lists and send it to the central committee for nomination. The provision to this effect is there, but whether to follow those are solely dependent on the party centre; local leaders have no way to ensure it. The local leaders noted that it is common practice that the central level will decide who will compete in the general election. As regards the selection and decision process of the centre, one local leader commented, "Here at the grassroots, there is a system of survey and performance assessment particularly during election, but the problem remains at the centre. Of course, it's also true that the party needs support and funds, and so, some businesspeople and bureaucrats enter the party and get the nomination." Local leaders understand the true democratic process as being changes in the party positions at various tiers including that of the party chief. At the same time, they perceive that the people do not support the change in the party chief position. They mention the example of the last Caretaker Government regime when the reform minded people tried to speak against the party chief and tried to restructure the centre as well as gather support for it, but they did not succeed, rather they were eventually sidelined. This is because, as the leaders and party activists think, people have not learnt to think as yet beyond Khaleda Zia or Sheikh Hasina. The party leaders think that the party chief has the onus to continue in the position, because of their long experience and dedication. One section said that sometimes the party has to face tough situations like during the last Caretaker Government when many of the party leaders including the party chiefs were put into jail. Many central leaders stood against the party chiefs directly or indirectly. The party leaders think that the party chiefs' convictions are unflinching. They would not compromise with their position and would not surrender to the external pressure. BNP leaders referred to the unconvincing stand of Tariq Zia, son of Khaleda Zia, during the toughest time. Tariq Zia, as they commented, has learnt politics from his family, seen many ups and downs, and knows the political culture well enough. He would not break in any situation. In bad time of the party, many other leaders, even the central ones, will look for opportunity or will turn back. They may not think of party chain of command and party strength. But Tariq Zia would stay as the symbol of power for the party and behind him the party people in the coming days would rally. This was proven while Tariq Zia was made Vice-Chairman of the party during the last national council. Akamal Khan, a BNP supporter, said, "Most of the common people of the country think they owe to either Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (AL founder) or Ziaur Rahman for their contributions to the country. So, they want to serve their family members. People like us have not learnt as yet to assess candidates or leaders based on their personality, education, talent and patriotism." In the Bangladesh political culture, party leadership is transferred so far from father to daughter, or from husband to wife, which is more of monarchic nature and against the democratic spirit. Local level leaders are not happy in the way the parties function. A major part of the aggrieved party activists and commoners observed that autocracies have been ousted from the state, but party autocracies are governing the state. They have little hope for changes with the current party leadership. Out of their excessive loyalty and submission to the powerful, most party leaders have turned into flatterers. Saiful Islam, the AL activist, observed, "The party people through their flattery would bring Joy (son of Sheikh Hasina) as their next leader. We are also looking forward to someone new who might bring good to the party, politics and country. Even if his favoured entrance in politics would disregard the democratic transition of party leadership, his absence might as well cause confusion and split in the party." At the grassroots level, the political leaders often point to the politicians themselves and the bureaucrats being weak and corrupt. Money can buy most of the politicians and bureaucrats. Weakness and corruption in these two sections have transferred into each corner of the society. The respondents lamented that these malpractices have damaged the social justice system, offended the rights of the citizens, suppressed the voice of the liberal people, restricted the door to choices, and above all obstructed the path to democratic improvement in the society. A potential district AL leader expressed his concern over the omnipresent misrule, misbehaviour and misdeeds in the current society mostly due to the degradation in the political culture as well as bureaucratic malfunctions. Corrections of these are not possible at the grassroots level, rather a top-down approach is required, because power and money are lying in the hands of a section of people. The common people cannot bring changes. Corruption, for example, in the field of student admission into colleges and universities, and misappropriation of government funds in the districts are due to the interests of the political leaders. He further added, "Admission business and tender related offences could not be possible, if the political leaders were honest and strict." A BNP leader said the political parties have their involvement in the local level big projects or fund management. The parties or political persons give shelter to the miscreants and embezzlers. In many cases, the central leaders get involved directly or indirectly. Democracy minded sections of both the parties doubt the party chiefs want to maintain democratic order in the parties, or want the party leaders to practice democracy either. Being the president or the chairperson, the party chiefs enjoy supreme authority, and unchallenged dictating power, which they do not want to lose in any case. The party chiefs are well aware of the performance and achievements of the party leaders, particularly of those at the party centres. The central level leaders maintain various nexuses of business, administrative power and cadres from the centres to the grassroots. These take place right under the chiefs' nose. The party chiefs keep mum and blind to the activities of these nexuses, and hardly make any sound against these until the patrons go too far for the commoners to tolerate, or until they do great harm to other party leaders. The interest of the public remains negligible to the parties. Political leaders in Bangladesh have failed to build an identity and a consensus around certain broad-based public policy goals. Unfortunately, both major political parties govern the country on a partisan basis, where the opinions of the majority remain unheard. This is the result of non-practicing of democracy within the political parties. The great enemies of our political leaders are sycophants who are in most cases corrupt, dishonest and inefficient. If a national leader is surrounded by such people, it pollutes administration, helps breed corruption and retards promotion of welfare of the people. Unfortunately, no reform of political parties has taken place, which is a necessity in the present day world. As we commonly know, holding of elections of the political parties or the parliament does not mean democracy. The word democracy in the present day world implies accountability, transparency, good governance and rule of law, apart from holding of fair, free and impartial elections. Democracy affords the people the most opportunities for meaningful participation in making decisions that shape their lives. In the major political parties, no one knows the criterion on which members of the committees are selected. These leaders are apparently selected, not elected through secret ballot. Therefore, the purpose of democracy is defeated. Experience of the common people indicate that political intrusion, criminalisation and immorality have deeply affected the social justice system. Political patronage has paved ways for further corruption and mal-practices in the society and state. When the party opens the door to the ill-educated and immoral people, these people turn into opportunists and look for return, violating rules and regulations, refuting laws and rights on the power politics supported by the party. Wrong nomination, wrong decisions and lobby politics aggravates the injuries deep into the heart of politics; it adds to the enmity, clash and divisions, which evidently lead to politics of violence and killing. The article is based on a study titled "Institutionalization of Democracy in the Political Parties in Bangladesh: Does Culture Matter?" carried out by the author between January - July 2010 as part of thesis at the North South University. He can be reached at e-mail : msaidurbd@yahoo.com
Putting aside their own merit and quality, the leaders of both the parties capitalise on the image of their respective party founders, and play mud-slinging at the other party people. As regards the failure of BNP in the Ninth Parliament election, the local leaders lamented over the excessive eulogy to party founder and less concern over meeting current needs of the people. One local BNP leader said, "How long will we only sell Ziaur Rahman (BNP founder)? We asked for a number of development activities, which the people demanded for a long time. In the locality, we need to build bridge, culvert, and build and maintain roads. The ministers become minister of their own areas, and forget the interest of the whole nation, and in a sense forget the long-term interest of the party." For candidate selection for the general election, the political parties have provision that the union committees will make a priority basis choice list of five candidates, which will gradually move to the district committees. The district committees will approve the choice lists and send it to the central committee for nomination. The provision to this effect is there, but whether to follow those are solely dependent on the party centre; local leaders have no way to ensure it. The local leaders noted that it is common practice that the central level will decide who will compete in the general election. As regards the selection and decision process of the centre, one local leader commented, "Here at the grassroots, there is a system of survey and performance assessment particularly during election, but the problem remains at the centre. Of course, it's also true that the party needs support and funds, and so, some businesspeople and bureaucrats enter the party and get the nomination." Local leaders understand the true democratic process as being changes in the party positions at various tiers including that of the party chief. At the same time, they perceive that the people do not support the change in the party chief position. They mention the example of the last Caretaker Government regime when the reform minded people tried to speak against the party chief and tried to restructure the centre as well as gather support for it, but they did not succeed, rather they were eventually sidelined. This is because, as the leaders and party activists think, people have not learnt to think as yet beyond Khaleda Zia or Sheikh Hasina. The party leaders think that the party chief has the onus to continue in the position, because of their long experience and dedication. One section said that sometimes the party has to face tough situations like during the last Caretaker Government when many of the party leaders including the party chiefs were put into jail. Many central leaders stood against the party chiefs directly or indirectly. The party leaders think that the party chiefs' convictions are unflinching. They would not compromise with their position and would not surrender to the external pressure. BNP leaders referred to the unconvincing stand of Tariq Zia, son of Khaleda Zia, during the toughest time. Tariq Zia, as they commented, has learnt politics from his family, seen many ups and downs, and knows the political culture well enough. He would not break in any situation. In bad time of the party, many other leaders, even the central ones, will look for opportunity or will turn back. They may not think of party chain of command and party strength. But Tariq Zia would stay as the symbol of power for the party and behind him the party people in the coming days would rally. This was proven while Tariq Zia was made Vice-Chairman of the party during the last national council. Akamal Khan, a BNP supporter, said, "Most of the common people of the country think they owe to either Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (AL founder) or Ziaur Rahman for their contributions to the country. So, they want to serve their family members. People like us have not learnt as yet to assess candidates or leaders based on their personality, education, talent and patriotism." In the Bangladesh political culture, party leadership is transferred so far from father to daughter, or from husband to wife, which is more of monarchic nature and against the democratic spirit. Local level leaders are not happy in the way the parties function. A major part of the aggrieved party activists and commoners observed that autocracies have been ousted from the state, but party autocracies are governing the state. They have little hope for changes with the current party leadership. Out of their excessive loyalty and submission to the powerful, most party leaders have turned into flatterers. Saiful Islam, the AL activist, observed, "The party people through their flattery would bring Joy (son of Sheikh Hasina) as their next leader. We are also looking forward to someone new who might bring good to the party, politics and country. Even if his favoured entrance in politics would disregard the democratic transition of party leadership, his absence might as well cause confusion and split in the party." At the grassroots level, the political leaders often point to the politicians themselves and the bureaucrats being weak and corrupt. Money can buy most of the politicians and bureaucrats. Weakness and corruption in these two sections have transferred into each corner of the society. The respondents lamented that these malpractices have damaged the social justice system, offended the rights of the citizens, suppressed the voice of the liberal people, restricted the door to choices, and above all obstructed the path to democratic improvement in the society. A potential district AL leader expressed his concern over the omnipresent misrule, misbehaviour and misdeeds in the current society mostly due to the degradation in the political culture as well as bureaucratic malfunctions. Corrections of these are not possible at the grassroots level, rather a top-down approach is required, because power and money are lying in the hands of a section of people. The common people cannot bring changes. Corruption, for example, in the field of student admission into colleges and universities, and misappropriation of government funds in the districts are due to the interests of the political leaders. He further added, "Admission business and tender related offences could not be possible, if the political leaders were honest and strict." A BNP leader said the political parties have their involvement in the local level big projects or fund management. The parties or political persons give shelter to the miscreants and embezzlers. In many cases, the central leaders get involved directly or indirectly. Democracy minded sections of both the parties doubt the party chiefs want to maintain democratic order in the parties, or want the party leaders to practice democracy either. Being the president or the chairperson, the party chiefs enjoy supreme authority, and unchallenged dictating power, which they do not want to lose in any case. The party chiefs are well aware of the performance and achievements of the party leaders, particularly of those at the party centres. The central level leaders maintain various nexuses of business, administrative power and cadres from the centres to the grassroots. These take place right under the chiefs' nose. The party chiefs keep mum and blind to the activities of these nexuses, and hardly make any sound against these until the patrons go too far for the commoners to tolerate, or until they do great harm to other party leaders. The interest of the public remains negligible to the parties. Political leaders in Bangladesh have failed to build an identity and a consensus around certain broad-based public policy goals. Unfortunately, both major political parties govern the country on a partisan basis, where the opinions of the majority remain unheard. This is the result of non-practicing of democracy within the political parties. The great enemies of our political leaders are sycophants who are in most cases corrupt, dishonest and inefficient. If a national leader is surrounded by such people, it pollutes administration, helps breed corruption and retards promotion of welfare of the people. Unfortunately, no reform of political parties has taken place, which is a necessity in the present day world. As we commonly know, holding of elections of the political parties or the parliament does not mean democracy. The word democracy in the present day world implies accountability, transparency, good governance and rule of law, apart from holding of fair, free and impartial elections. Democracy affords the people the most opportunities for meaningful participation in making decisions that shape their lives. In the major political parties, no one knows the criterion on which members of the committees are selected. These leaders are apparently selected, not elected through secret ballot. Therefore, the purpose of democracy is defeated. Experience of the common people indicate that political intrusion, criminalisation and immorality have deeply affected the social justice system. Political patronage has paved ways for further corruption and mal-practices in the society and state. When the party opens the door to the ill-educated and immoral people, these people turn into opportunists and look for return, violating rules and regulations, refuting laws and rights on the power politics supported by the party. Wrong nomination, wrong decisions and lobby politics aggravates the injuries deep into the heart of politics; it adds to the enmity, clash and divisions, which evidently lead to politics of violence and killing. The article is based on a study titled "Institutionalization of Democracy in the Political Parties in Bangladesh: Does Culture Matter?" carried out by the author between January - July 2010 as part of thesis at the North South University. He can be reached at e-mail : msaidurbd@yahoo.com