Crisis in governance and state of democracy

Dr. M. Ataur Rahman
Bangladesh's existence as an independent nation has been traumatic as well as promising. The first decade witnessed extreme volatility in politics, the second decade with a brief interlude of civilian-democratic regime, was marked by a long period of authoritarian rule. The dawn of 1990s witnessed changing notes -- the global democratic revolution paved the way for democratisation in Bangladesh. The return to a democratic rule in 1991 with a consensus on parliamentary system of government was an important episode in the nation's political history. The continuation of democratic rule for the past twelve and half years, amid serious power conflicts, and peaceful transition ensured through a constitutional provision of 'care taker' government, signifies Bangladesh's success in sustaining a fledgling democracy. Today, in 2004, the country seems to have come to another 'turning point' for consolidation of her democratic governance.

The record of the present government in the past twenty eight months in crucial areas of governance i.e., public law and order, combating corruption, bureaucratic performance, and human security has fallen short of citizens' expectations. The politicians of different strokes, including one former president, a noted lawyer came out publicly to criticise the government for its inability to stem the tide of corruption and crime in the society, and suffering from lack of direction. The major opposition -- Bangladesh Awami League -- taking advantage of the situation, is refusing to attend the Parliament aiming to undercut the legitimacy of the parliamentary government. The current impasse has created widespread concerns among the people about the procedure as well as substance of democracy. People are also looking dispassionately about the performance of the ruling BNP-dominated Alliance, as well as the tasks and responsibilities of the main opposition party.

I have argued in this article that the root cause lies in the lack of reforms in political parties at this stage of our democratisation. The renowned political scientist Seymour Martin Lipset, in a 1998 article in the Journal of Democracy talked about the indispensability of political parties as " a social mechanism that permits the largest possible part of the population to influence major decisions by choosing among the contenders for political office". The parties therefore act as training ground for political leaders who will eventually assume a role in governing society. In addition, the parties contest and seek to win elections in order to manage government institutions. Civil society, often termed as ''wellspring of democracy" is romantic and cannot replace political parties. Therefore, emphasis should be given to reform of political parties. Without strong political parties and institutions that are accountable and effective, the democratic process cannot function for the good of the people.

In Bangladesh, despite an abundance of advocacy and citizen groups, and NGOs, 'the recurring partisan political stalemate consigns the country and its citizens to abject poverty'. Although Bangladesh has moved from military-authoritarian rule over the past decade, it has appeared that the main political leaders have learnt little, and contributed to the continuing political impasse. The influence wielded by leaders of major political parties over supporters and citizens is constantly used for narrow individual, group or partisan purposes. These leaders are the ones who promote divisions in society at large. The reforms in political parties will make them stronger institutionally and people will hold them in higher esteem. The political parties and civil society will, then, become natural allies where parties reach out and engage civic groups and cooperate with them on specific issues. Otherwise, the political parties in Bangladesh will degenerate into personalistic, hereditary, self-serving political entities unable to satisfy the expectations of the people and undermine the ethos of democracy.

There are many examples where parties have lost their mandate to function because of their mismanagement of the political system. In Pakistan, for example, political parties effectively frittered away their credibility to the point where military's overthrow of established political order in 1999 was accepted. Venezuela provides another illustration of what happens in the absence of a credible party system. Both Social Democrats and Christian Democrats, in a two-party system dominated the politics. Both the parties lost touch with the electorate, failed to tackle increasing corruption in their ranks and showed scant regard for the poor. They became discredited in the eyes of citizens, enabling Hugo Chavez to emerge from the political vacuum promoting an image of an honest military man, who was elected President in 1999.

In Bangladesh, there is a strong perception among large segments of society that political parties are ineffective and out of touch with their needs. The exposure of scandals and corruption done by party leaders through media has diminished the image of parties and leaders. Lack of ethics in rank and file of political parties is a serious flaw. Nomination process, leadership positions and distribution of economic benefits are the major concerns of party activists. The democratisation of political parties and transparency in operation of party and government functions are essential for renewal and reform of political parties in Bangladesh. The young leadership must be groomed and trained to replace the older generation who are still dominating the political landscape. We should not take any comfort from the current crisis, as the decline of political parties ultimately threatens the foundations of democracy.

No doubt, the question of good governance is endlessly complex. Nevertheless, establishing and maintaining just democratic institutions is critical to reducing the severity of the ethical dilemma facing political leaders. Just institutions are not plagued by bribery and graft. When political leaders and officials engage in such behaviour, they can be called to account by an independent and honest judiciary or Anti-Corruption Commission. In a properly functioning democracy, taking grievances to the streets is not necessary, because elections, lobbying, and normal legislative processes allow a full airing and reasonable consideration of all points of view. By the same token, political violence has no place when peaceful electoral and legislative processes exist. Again, the highest ethical requirement placed on political leaders is to contribute to creating and maintaining justice in their society. In societies that are struggling to consolidate democracy, as in Bangladesh, this means striving for institutions that will make justice possible, and without justice there is no moral, and subsequently political legitimacy.

Dr. M. Ataur Rahman, Professor of Political Science, Dhaka University, is President, Bangladesh Political Science Association