logo

Revised RPO (Amendment, 2008), constitution and democracy

Dr. Mustafizur Rahman | Thursday, 28 August 2008


THE Election Commission (EC) has done an arduous job of collecting and compiling views of a cross-section of concerned citizens and different political parties - small, large, new, old, already registered and un-registered ones. This scribe observed in the very first EC meeting that the views were naturally diverse as different groups, existing parties and conscious citizens wanted to speak from their own positions, not necessarily from the position of general people longing for a serious and rational political system capable of ensuring a national government that serves the people and the state with a committed vision.

The whole discussions apparently obsessed the EC with loud demand of non-ruling parties as well as concerned citizens to get away with the influence of money, muscle, abuse of power, party-nomination business, incapacitation of institutions, institutionalized extortion, project hunting and tender grabbing for kickback, terrorism, corruption of all definition under anarchic administration, creation of governments within the Government and finally a parliamentary dictatorship, giving a damn to the general people before the caretaker government (CTG) was formed in October 2006. Loan default and bill default by MPs also surfaced prominently. Many people, including this writer himself wrote repeatedly in the press about possible solutions and way out, and directly sent recommendations to the EC for deeper changes in RPO 1972.

We appreciate EC's bold proposals, but in some cases they seem to have over-reacted and contradicted the people's basic right and dignity which a democracy is supposed to uphold. Here only a few items of concern are touched upon to preempt recurrence and aggravation of the past evils.

Restriction on public officials: The final draft recommendations of the EC embodied in the draft amendment of RPO (Representation of the People Order), 1972 and the promulgated ordinance-2008 do have a number of provisions which are likely to have far-reaching effect in shaping our political culture. Mostly welcome by aspirant party-politicians were such provisions as "A person shall be disqualified for election as or for being a member of [parliament], if he has resigned or retired from the service of the republic or of any statutory public authority or of the defense service, unless a period of three years has elapsed since the date of his resignation or retirement," and that the same will apply to an ex-chief executive of a non-government organization (NGO). To put simply, most of them need de-education and re-education for certain years to start thinking of the people, their honour and the society based on the abstract principle of managing affairs of an independent nation. The provision shall affect the choice of president and advisers, in that the legislature shall elect a president within 30 days of its first sitting, and persons ineligible to be a lawmaker shall not be qualified to be the president or advisers of Caretaker Government as well (as per constitutional stipulation).

Restriction on professional bodies in party politics: The ban on professional bodies, students, teachers and labourers working in industries to engage themselves in party politics is necessary and reasonable, which is supported by about 84.54 per cent of the people as revealed in a survey.

Extension of "office of profit": It may be suggested here that a director or Chairman of a company or an executive of other organizations receiving remuneration or other benefit should resign from office before filing nomination paper.

This may be justified by extending the meaning of "office of profit" for the sake of contest on plain field and without probable use of the resources of the companies or organizations a candidate may have influence over.

Loan and bill default vis-