Transforming leadership can bring fundamental changes
Sunday, 10 January 2010
Professor Zillur R. Khan
There is a need for rethinking security, sovereignty and justice -- three vital concepts shaping human relationships at different levels since recorded history. I'll raise a few questions with a special focus on South Asia. First, in the rapidly evolving reality of a three-way pull between Globalism, Nationalism and Localism could leaders at different levels engage in developing an innovative World MAP (Mutually Assured Peace) -- a new world where a balance could be struck between security and sovereignty through justice? Could such efforts help unleash human energies for ensuring development as Freedom and containing unfreedoms of poverty and suppressions? Second, could the unresolved legacies of regional-cum-ideological conflicts and a weak political culture serve as catalysts to transform the state-society relations to a new model of a positive national sovereignty -- a cooperative sovereignty of the citizen and the service-provider character of state institutions? Could this development change the traditional definition of national sovereignty, outmoding ethnocentric behaviour and negative aspects of nationalism? Third, against the backdrop of geopolitical and ideological rivalries could countries with Muslim majority or large Muslim minority meet their development needs by progressive openness? Could India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, among others, engage in fruitful cooperation with the developed world in demanding environmental justice in dealing with global warming by launching "Green Programmes"? Given the fact that developed countries have been mostly responsible for the increase of earth's temperature does justice as basic fairness demand that they provide needed support to the developing countries, particularly Bangladesh as the most vulnerable, to combat its adverse effects? This raises a crucial question about sovereignty itself. In ensuring environmental justice could sovereign nations assert their right to peaceful nuclear energy as the new mark of national sovereignty?
The last question is a multiple one revolving around power and justice. Given the political reality that institutionalisation of power is an arduous, painful and long-drawn process, what new strategies or rethinking of existing ones must be applied to check human propensity to personalise and perpetuate power positions by any means undermining justice itself? Could unrestrained power impede multifaceted development and compromise freedom? Could transforming leadership and enduring institutionalisation of power relationships make a difference in the struggle against poverty and unfreedoms? These are questions for which no tailored answers fit perfectly. Only thing I can do here is to make an attempt to offer a few alternatives.
Giving everyone his due -- rights, authority, accountability and equal opportunity to get education to develop one's innate ability -- has been a core guideline of Justice from Plato to John Rawls to Amartya Sen. Rights as a matter of basic justice have been expanding since English and American Bills of Rights culminating in the civil and voting rights legislations of the sixties, which added "compensatory" as an important dimension of justice. This became the legal as well as moral basis of affirmative action programmes in America and elsewhere. But it takes deep commitment of leaders -- executive, legislative, judicial or any combination -- to translate justice from legal acts to operational reality. As always the difficult and complex work of applying justice for human development inevitably falls on the shoulders of leaders and followers at every level. Leadership, therefore, has been a special focus in the literature on political development in its various facets. Without the leaders' capacity to balance security and freedom through justice in an institutional framework, transformation of their own consciousness along with their followers cannot happen. And without it fundamental changes could never take place and well-intentioned reforms would seldom have their desired results. Regardless of the type -- moral, constitutional, legal, bureaucratic or charismatic, leaders become ineffective without their ability to transform vital goals into tangible programmes of action. For that they need knowledge, relevant experience, an iron will to control their "cocoon weaving mind guards" and a touch of wisdom to bring about tactical reforms and avoid political disasters. In the new information age of face books and twitters, leaders must not only bypass screening of negative feedbacks but also learn how to leverage the deluge of information classifying and clarifying with the specific purpose to engage and motivate citizens and functionaries for improving governance.
Power and power relations in different categories and manifestations occupy another important research subject concerning political development. Defined as an exercise of control over others, power, particularly its legitimate exercise, becomes an indispensable tool for leaders as decision makers and implementers at local, national and global levels. But without definable boundaries, power loses its legitimacy and becomes pathological. The body politic then starts showing symptoms of a worsening disease, such as rapidly spreading corruption, coercion, extortion and self-service to the detriment of national interests.
For a balanced exercise of state powers definable limits must be delineated. It can be done by the constitutional requirement of accountability and transparency in not only policy making processes but also in the implementing decisions of judicial and bureaucratic leaders. For the latter the concept of Neutral Competence plays a primordial role. It specifically applies to important recruitment and regulatory agencies, such as Public Service Commission, Income Tax Commission, Anti-Corruption Commission, National Board of Revenue, Security and Exchange Commission and Supreme Judicial Council, among relevant others. Again a deep commitment of top leaders to a delicate balance between blind justice, rights and appropriate obligations could give an acceptable shape to political neutrality and administrative competence of judicial and bureaucratic institutions. For this two prerequisites have to be met. One is an independent, politically neutral and competent judiciary. The other is a strong, non-partisan Election Commission. Despite a recent legislation [in Bangladesh] it would be very difficult to institutionalise judicial independence and integrity [in the country] without a basic structural change, ensuring once and for all the separation of the judiciary from the executive and legislative branches of government, which epitomises the concept of checks and balances so badly needed for political stability. Without it the hopeful process of democratisation of many developing nations could come to a grinding halt. And consistent democratisation requires electoral justice -- giving each candidate for any elected office a fair chance on a level playing field to win.
Indeed, electoral justice is the foundation of any democratic government. However, it needs a firm institutional framework to prevent electoral fraud and violence, which routinely claims lives in elections in most developing countries. The process of choosing leaders by free and fair elections has eluded most third world nations, most recent case being in Iran during June 2009 where questionable elections resulted in mass protests and government crackdown claiming a number of innocent lives, not to mention the troubled and questionable elections held in Afghanistan in July-August, 2009 under the security umbrella of US-led NATO countries.
An enforceable guideline for holding all elections must have a tested method to prepare an above-board electoral roll, verify fiscal accountability of candidates, provide impartial monitoring of polling stations, and impose heavy fines and imprisonment for fraudulent voting. A non-partisan Election Commission with Subpoena and Contempt power, headed by a strong willed, politically neutral Chief Election Commissioner would have the constitutional authority to rule on disputed electoral outcome on a case by case basis, allowing judicial appeal as a last resort. An unquestionable, above-board election gives elected leaders the legitimacy to mobilise public support, even among segments of opposition parties, for a myriad of important policies. As well by upholding electoral justice leaders could then begin a transforming process in which free and fair elections become a routine political phenomenon in developing nations. Particularly in the case of Bangladesh, lawmakers sought to ensure free and fair elections by incorporating an amendment to the constitution mandating that all general elections be administered under a non-partisan Caretaker Government. Given the weakness of institutions, a constitutionally empowered election commission may not be strong enough to withstand increasing pressure from an incumbent government to tilt the balance in its favour. Much as any ruling party would like to end the Caretaker Government innovation by repealing the 13th amendment to the constitution, it might be a prudent political move to continue it for a few more general elections.
Closely connected with electoral justice is Representational Justice. Is it just to have representation in parliament that is grossly disproportionate to votes won by a political party in general elections? For instance, in spite of AL winning more than 33% votes in 2001 election it received less than 10% seats in the Parliament and the situation was reversed in 2008. In spite of winning more than 30% popular votes BNP got less than 9% of parliamentary seats. More often than not the "winner-take-all" mentality has been responsible for parliamentary dysfunction. A change in the electoral system may be tried on an experimental basis replacing "winner-take-all" with proportional representation in randomly selected constituencies in which percentage of votes by different parties in the general election would reflect the number of parliamentary seats won by them. In this a majority rather than plurality of votes through run-off elections, if needed, may prevent a situation where a candidate winning 20% of popular votes gets elected as MP. Whether by a continuous public debate or by a constitutional convention, it is important to build a national consensus for resolving the issue of appropriate electoral system for a stable Democracy in not only Bangladesh but other South Asian countries as well.
Also for representational justice there must be a process by which the elected can be held accountable between general elections. With its two-thirds majority in Parliament could the ruling party seriously consider incorporating a constitutional amendment to utilise strategies of "Recall" to vote corrupt elected officials out of office in special elections? Again, for representational justice could they consider by the same process to empower voters to propose and ratify important public policies through respectively "Initiative" and "Referendum" in special and/or general elections. This Swiss electoral innovation has been incorporated in a majority of American State Constitutions (37) and a number of European countries with positive outcome.
Perhaps a future bicameral legislature in Bangladesh could significantly alleviate the felt problem of representation, particularly for women, in the highest policy making body. Representational justice demands much more than what the 45 nominated women parliamentarians could hope to accomplish. For example, in a future upper house the method of proportional representation could significantly give women, smaller political parties and occupational-professional groups a sure way to increase participation in the national-cum-subnational policymaking processes, helping to check any excesses of the other house and to build policy consensus on national goals as well. To that end, Japan has effectively combined the two electoral methods, namely 300 single-member districts and 180 multi-member proportional representation constituencies in the lower house of its legislative body (Diet).
Both representational justice and development as freedom can be further ensured by devolution of authority to the grassroots. It would make the local government system more self-reliant. This in turn would reduce its over-dependence on the bureaucracy, thereby helping the people at the rice-roots level to take initiative in defining and solving a myriad of local problems. The self-help and creativity thus engendered could become a major force of nation building. It could also lead to greater economic development in rural areas setting perhaps a new trend of reverse migration from urban to rural areas, significantly narrowing the urban-rural divide and the resulting socio-economic-political problems facing many of today's developing countries, including Bangladesh.
For sustainable human development tolerance has been a positive influence throughout history. Lack of relative tolerance has led to the fall of empires, civilisations and nation states (Chua, 2009: 1-200). Basically Bangladesh has been and is a relatively tolerant nation, which some religious extremists have sought to change overtly by terrorism and covertly using certain militant parties as vehicles to spread a distorted interpretation of a great world religion -- Islam. To ensure justice, averting possible incidents of injustice, violent fanatics must be brought under control. An effective, sustainable way to do it will be through the restoration of the tolerant and knowledge-based thrust of education, which shapes a nation (Plato, Republic). Particularly religious education in Bangladesh cries out for significant curricular reform to strike a balance between theological and scientific focus in most religious schools called Madrassas, particularly private or Quami ones chiefly supported by Wahhabi charities whose trainees or Talibs emerged as Pakistani, Afghani and Bangladeshi Talibans. Despite Qudrat-i-Khuda Commission's recommendations in the early seventies followed by 1996 Education Reform and General Musharraf's public commitment in 2002 to bring basic curricular change in Madrassas, no qualitative change has taken place. In fact, distortions of some theological concepts have continued unabated spewing hatred against the "others", often resulting in increased militancy against women, minorities and those perceived by them as secularists.
As an important part of general education reform political leaders regardless of their party affiliations must consider de-linking student groups from partisan politics and allocate significantly more resources to human resources development, particularly for Research and Development (R&D) initiatives at different universities and institutes of science and technology. The de-linking will contain militia politics, which causes socio-political unrest not only in Bangladesh but most other developing countries as well.
As global leadership for dynamic human development would be an important precondition for global peace, so would regional and national leadership for regional peace. This would require fundamental changes in the perception of long-term mutual benefits over short-term apprehensions of mutual threats. Public-private policy forums, jointly sponsored by government and civil society groups, would help clarify problems and issues being faced and how best to address them in order to achieve consensus for national security without compromising justice, importantly reflected in mutual tolerance. Such an approach may inspire development as freedom itself (Sen, Development…2000).
Values connected to bureaucratic power and electoral authority need to be re-assessed and re-prioritised. To this end interactive, inter-sectoral decision making and implementing institutions could be formed for different purposes. For example, the charge of one of such institutions --Accountability Commission or by any other name -- could be to publicise dangerously counterproductive delays of policy implementation in specific cases and the degree of duplication, inefficiency and corruption, if any, involved. Such mobilisation of support from the civil society could help increase responsiveness, cut red tape and remove unexplainable bureaucratic barriers against policy implementation for good governance. In this context, the constitutional provision of "Ombudsman" could be implemented [in Bangladesh], at least on a trial basis, hopefully beginning early this year as announced.
Transparency engenders accountability, ensuring the Right of Information. Free flow of information is vital to any functional democracy, helping to create an open society in which transparency and accountability of policy making and implementing processes become a part of the political culture. Research shows that free flow of information and open communication provide the foundation of not only good policy making processes but also effective governance.
This important value of democracy must be institutionalised through an enforceable Freedom of Information Act. Unless the government can demonstrate that any piece of information being sought by a citizen is likely to compromise national security, it must be accessible to the concerned citizens. Institutionally a non-partisan Information Commission with Subpoena and Contempt powers could be put in place to enforce the guidelines of the Information Act and hold hearings, if and when needed. Free flow of information would enhance accountability in decision making and implementing processes in both public and private sectors.
National stability is connected with regional stability and peace. Regional and inter-regional cooperation and coordination reiterate and reinforce that linkage. The current regional organisation of South Asia, namely SAARC, and other possible sub-regional organisations could emulate, if not replicate, the experiences of regional cooperation and resulting peaceful development in ASEAN, EU and OAS nations. …(R)egional cooperation is vital in addressing regional conflicts which have routinely hurt regional trade and prevented coordinated regional strategies for solving a myriad of dangerous problems, such as water and energy shortages, deforestation, refugees and militant extremism --all creating obstacles to poverty alleviation.
If European countries could come together forming a viable union to tackle their common problems after centuries of warfare there is no reason why South Asian countries with less traumatic experiences could not. In that scenario Bangladesh could play a primordial role as Belgium did in forming the European Union. This would be a good way to reinforce the principle of justice as basic fairness in dealing not only with poverty alleviation but also with other intra-regional issues and concerns. After all, Bangladesh did start the regional movement for cooperation among South Asian countries.
(This is the keynote address Professor Zillur R. Khan, Professor Emeritus, University of Wisconsin, USA, delivered at a workshop on 'Security, Sovereignty and Justice, held jointly by the International Political Science Association and the Policy Research Institute in Dhaka on January 5. Prof. Zillur can be reached at e-mail: zillurrkhan@hotmail.com)
There is a need for rethinking security, sovereignty and justice -- three vital concepts shaping human relationships at different levels since recorded history. I'll raise a few questions with a special focus on South Asia. First, in the rapidly evolving reality of a three-way pull between Globalism, Nationalism and Localism could leaders at different levels engage in developing an innovative World MAP (Mutually Assured Peace) -- a new world where a balance could be struck between security and sovereignty through justice? Could such efforts help unleash human energies for ensuring development as Freedom and containing unfreedoms of poverty and suppressions? Second, could the unresolved legacies of regional-cum-ideological conflicts and a weak political culture serve as catalysts to transform the state-society relations to a new model of a positive national sovereignty -- a cooperative sovereignty of the citizen and the service-provider character of state institutions? Could this development change the traditional definition of national sovereignty, outmoding ethnocentric behaviour and negative aspects of nationalism? Third, against the backdrop of geopolitical and ideological rivalries could countries with Muslim majority or large Muslim minority meet their development needs by progressive openness? Could India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, among others, engage in fruitful cooperation with the developed world in demanding environmental justice in dealing with global warming by launching "Green Programmes"? Given the fact that developed countries have been mostly responsible for the increase of earth's temperature does justice as basic fairness demand that they provide needed support to the developing countries, particularly Bangladesh as the most vulnerable, to combat its adverse effects? This raises a crucial question about sovereignty itself. In ensuring environmental justice could sovereign nations assert their right to peaceful nuclear energy as the new mark of national sovereignty?
The last question is a multiple one revolving around power and justice. Given the political reality that institutionalisation of power is an arduous, painful and long-drawn process, what new strategies or rethinking of existing ones must be applied to check human propensity to personalise and perpetuate power positions by any means undermining justice itself? Could unrestrained power impede multifaceted development and compromise freedom? Could transforming leadership and enduring institutionalisation of power relationships make a difference in the struggle against poverty and unfreedoms? These are questions for which no tailored answers fit perfectly. Only thing I can do here is to make an attempt to offer a few alternatives.
Giving everyone his due -- rights, authority, accountability and equal opportunity to get education to develop one's innate ability -- has been a core guideline of Justice from Plato to John Rawls to Amartya Sen. Rights as a matter of basic justice have been expanding since English and American Bills of Rights culminating in the civil and voting rights legislations of the sixties, which added "compensatory" as an important dimension of justice. This became the legal as well as moral basis of affirmative action programmes in America and elsewhere. But it takes deep commitment of leaders -- executive, legislative, judicial or any combination -- to translate justice from legal acts to operational reality. As always the difficult and complex work of applying justice for human development inevitably falls on the shoulders of leaders and followers at every level. Leadership, therefore, has been a special focus in the literature on political development in its various facets. Without the leaders' capacity to balance security and freedom through justice in an institutional framework, transformation of their own consciousness along with their followers cannot happen. And without it fundamental changes could never take place and well-intentioned reforms would seldom have their desired results. Regardless of the type -- moral, constitutional, legal, bureaucratic or charismatic, leaders become ineffective without their ability to transform vital goals into tangible programmes of action. For that they need knowledge, relevant experience, an iron will to control their "cocoon weaving mind guards" and a touch of wisdom to bring about tactical reforms and avoid political disasters. In the new information age of face books and twitters, leaders must not only bypass screening of negative feedbacks but also learn how to leverage the deluge of information classifying and clarifying with the specific purpose to engage and motivate citizens and functionaries for improving governance.
Power and power relations in different categories and manifestations occupy another important research subject concerning political development. Defined as an exercise of control over others, power, particularly its legitimate exercise, becomes an indispensable tool for leaders as decision makers and implementers at local, national and global levels. But without definable boundaries, power loses its legitimacy and becomes pathological. The body politic then starts showing symptoms of a worsening disease, such as rapidly spreading corruption, coercion, extortion and self-service to the detriment of national interests.
For a balanced exercise of state powers definable limits must be delineated. It can be done by the constitutional requirement of accountability and transparency in not only policy making processes but also in the implementing decisions of judicial and bureaucratic leaders. For the latter the concept of Neutral Competence plays a primordial role. It specifically applies to important recruitment and regulatory agencies, such as Public Service Commission, Income Tax Commission, Anti-Corruption Commission, National Board of Revenue, Security and Exchange Commission and Supreme Judicial Council, among relevant others. Again a deep commitment of top leaders to a delicate balance between blind justice, rights and appropriate obligations could give an acceptable shape to political neutrality and administrative competence of judicial and bureaucratic institutions. For this two prerequisites have to be met. One is an independent, politically neutral and competent judiciary. The other is a strong, non-partisan Election Commission. Despite a recent legislation [in Bangladesh] it would be very difficult to institutionalise judicial independence and integrity [in the country] without a basic structural change, ensuring once and for all the separation of the judiciary from the executive and legislative branches of government, which epitomises the concept of checks and balances so badly needed for political stability. Without it the hopeful process of democratisation of many developing nations could come to a grinding halt. And consistent democratisation requires electoral justice -- giving each candidate for any elected office a fair chance on a level playing field to win.
Indeed, electoral justice is the foundation of any democratic government. However, it needs a firm institutional framework to prevent electoral fraud and violence, which routinely claims lives in elections in most developing countries. The process of choosing leaders by free and fair elections has eluded most third world nations, most recent case being in Iran during June 2009 where questionable elections resulted in mass protests and government crackdown claiming a number of innocent lives, not to mention the troubled and questionable elections held in Afghanistan in July-August, 2009 under the security umbrella of US-led NATO countries.
An enforceable guideline for holding all elections must have a tested method to prepare an above-board electoral roll, verify fiscal accountability of candidates, provide impartial monitoring of polling stations, and impose heavy fines and imprisonment for fraudulent voting. A non-partisan Election Commission with Subpoena and Contempt power, headed by a strong willed, politically neutral Chief Election Commissioner would have the constitutional authority to rule on disputed electoral outcome on a case by case basis, allowing judicial appeal as a last resort. An unquestionable, above-board election gives elected leaders the legitimacy to mobilise public support, even among segments of opposition parties, for a myriad of important policies. As well by upholding electoral justice leaders could then begin a transforming process in which free and fair elections become a routine political phenomenon in developing nations. Particularly in the case of Bangladesh, lawmakers sought to ensure free and fair elections by incorporating an amendment to the constitution mandating that all general elections be administered under a non-partisan Caretaker Government. Given the weakness of institutions, a constitutionally empowered election commission may not be strong enough to withstand increasing pressure from an incumbent government to tilt the balance in its favour. Much as any ruling party would like to end the Caretaker Government innovation by repealing the 13th amendment to the constitution, it might be a prudent political move to continue it for a few more general elections.
Closely connected with electoral justice is Representational Justice. Is it just to have representation in parliament that is grossly disproportionate to votes won by a political party in general elections? For instance, in spite of AL winning more than 33% votes in 2001 election it received less than 10% seats in the Parliament and the situation was reversed in 2008. In spite of winning more than 30% popular votes BNP got less than 9% of parliamentary seats. More often than not the "winner-take-all" mentality has been responsible for parliamentary dysfunction. A change in the electoral system may be tried on an experimental basis replacing "winner-take-all" with proportional representation in randomly selected constituencies in which percentage of votes by different parties in the general election would reflect the number of parliamentary seats won by them. In this a majority rather than plurality of votes through run-off elections, if needed, may prevent a situation where a candidate winning 20% of popular votes gets elected as MP. Whether by a continuous public debate or by a constitutional convention, it is important to build a national consensus for resolving the issue of appropriate electoral system for a stable Democracy in not only Bangladesh but other South Asian countries as well.
Also for representational justice there must be a process by which the elected can be held accountable between general elections. With its two-thirds majority in Parliament could the ruling party seriously consider incorporating a constitutional amendment to utilise strategies of "Recall" to vote corrupt elected officials out of office in special elections? Again, for representational justice could they consider by the same process to empower voters to propose and ratify important public policies through respectively "Initiative" and "Referendum" in special and/or general elections. This Swiss electoral innovation has been incorporated in a majority of American State Constitutions (37) and a number of European countries with positive outcome.
Perhaps a future bicameral legislature in Bangladesh could significantly alleviate the felt problem of representation, particularly for women, in the highest policy making body. Representational justice demands much more than what the 45 nominated women parliamentarians could hope to accomplish. For example, in a future upper house the method of proportional representation could significantly give women, smaller political parties and occupational-professional groups a sure way to increase participation in the national-cum-subnational policymaking processes, helping to check any excesses of the other house and to build policy consensus on national goals as well. To that end, Japan has effectively combined the two electoral methods, namely 300 single-member districts and 180 multi-member proportional representation constituencies in the lower house of its legislative body (Diet).
Both representational justice and development as freedom can be further ensured by devolution of authority to the grassroots. It would make the local government system more self-reliant. This in turn would reduce its over-dependence on the bureaucracy, thereby helping the people at the rice-roots level to take initiative in defining and solving a myriad of local problems. The self-help and creativity thus engendered could become a major force of nation building. It could also lead to greater economic development in rural areas setting perhaps a new trend of reverse migration from urban to rural areas, significantly narrowing the urban-rural divide and the resulting socio-economic-political problems facing many of today's developing countries, including Bangladesh.
For sustainable human development tolerance has been a positive influence throughout history. Lack of relative tolerance has led to the fall of empires, civilisations and nation states (Chua, 2009: 1-200). Basically Bangladesh has been and is a relatively tolerant nation, which some religious extremists have sought to change overtly by terrorism and covertly using certain militant parties as vehicles to spread a distorted interpretation of a great world religion -- Islam. To ensure justice, averting possible incidents of injustice, violent fanatics must be brought under control. An effective, sustainable way to do it will be through the restoration of the tolerant and knowledge-based thrust of education, which shapes a nation (Plato, Republic). Particularly religious education in Bangladesh cries out for significant curricular reform to strike a balance between theological and scientific focus in most religious schools called Madrassas, particularly private or Quami ones chiefly supported by Wahhabi charities whose trainees or Talibs emerged as Pakistani, Afghani and Bangladeshi Talibans. Despite Qudrat-i-Khuda Commission's recommendations in the early seventies followed by 1996 Education Reform and General Musharraf's public commitment in 2002 to bring basic curricular change in Madrassas, no qualitative change has taken place. In fact, distortions of some theological concepts have continued unabated spewing hatred against the "others", often resulting in increased militancy against women, minorities and those perceived by them as secularists.
As an important part of general education reform political leaders regardless of their party affiliations must consider de-linking student groups from partisan politics and allocate significantly more resources to human resources development, particularly for Research and Development (R&D) initiatives at different universities and institutes of science and technology. The de-linking will contain militia politics, which causes socio-political unrest not only in Bangladesh but most other developing countries as well.
As global leadership for dynamic human development would be an important precondition for global peace, so would regional and national leadership for regional peace. This would require fundamental changes in the perception of long-term mutual benefits over short-term apprehensions of mutual threats. Public-private policy forums, jointly sponsored by government and civil society groups, would help clarify problems and issues being faced and how best to address them in order to achieve consensus for national security without compromising justice, importantly reflected in mutual tolerance. Such an approach may inspire development as freedom itself (Sen, Development…2000).
Values connected to bureaucratic power and electoral authority need to be re-assessed and re-prioritised. To this end interactive, inter-sectoral decision making and implementing institutions could be formed for different purposes. For example, the charge of one of such institutions --Accountability Commission or by any other name -- could be to publicise dangerously counterproductive delays of policy implementation in specific cases and the degree of duplication, inefficiency and corruption, if any, involved. Such mobilisation of support from the civil society could help increase responsiveness, cut red tape and remove unexplainable bureaucratic barriers against policy implementation for good governance. In this context, the constitutional provision of "Ombudsman" could be implemented [in Bangladesh], at least on a trial basis, hopefully beginning early this year as announced.
Transparency engenders accountability, ensuring the Right of Information. Free flow of information is vital to any functional democracy, helping to create an open society in which transparency and accountability of policy making and implementing processes become a part of the political culture. Research shows that free flow of information and open communication provide the foundation of not only good policy making processes but also effective governance.
This important value of democracy must be institutionalised through an enforceable Freedom of Information Act. Unless the government can demonstrate that any piece of information being sought by a citizen is likely to compromise national security, it must be accessible to the concerned citizens. Institutionally a non-partisan Information Commission with Subpoena and Contempt powers could be put in place to enforce the guidelines of the Information Act and hold hearings, if and when needed. Free flow of information would enhance accountability in decision making and implementing processes in both public and private sectors.
National stability is connected with regional stability and peace. Regional and inter-regional cooperation and coordination reiterate and reinforce that linkage. The current regional organisation of South Asia, namely SAARC, and other possible sub-regional organisations could emulate, if not replicate, the experiences of regional cooperation and resulting peaceful development in ASEAN, EU and OAS nations. …(R)egional cooperation is vital in addressing regional conflicts which have routinely hurt regional trade and prevented coordinated regional strategies for solving a myriad of dangerous problems, such as water and energy shortages, deforestation, refugees and militant extremism --all creating obstacles to poverty alleviation.
If European countries could come together forming a viable union to tackle their common problems after centuries of warfare there is no reason why South Asian countries with less traumatic experiences could not. In that scenario Bangladesh could play a primordial role as Belgium did in forming the European Union. This would be a good way to reinforce the principle of justice as basic fairness in dealing not only with poverty alleviation but also with other intra-regional issues and concerns. After all, Bangladesh did start the regional movement for cooperation among South Asian countries.
(This is the keynote address Professor Zillur R. Khan, Professor Emeritus, University of Wisconsin, USA, delivered at a workshop on 'Security, Sovereignty and Justice, held jointly by the International Political Science Association and the Policy Research Institute in Dhaka on January 5. Prof. Zillur can be reached at e-mail: zillurrkhan@hotmail.com)