Frequent amendment is not graceful but ...

It is quite understandable that Mr. Kibria, as a party member, will opt for reforms of the present caretaker system as it is the stand of his own party. The official evaluation of Awami League on the last election is, that the party suffered a heavy defeat due to the motivated role of Caretaker Government, the President, the Chief Election Commissioner, especially the chief adviser of the caretaker government Justice Latifur Rahman. On the other hand, it is also not hard to understand that Justice Latifur Rahman will prefer not to be involved in any reform issue as he had performed his duty as the head of the caretaker government during the immediate past general election. In fact, nobody other than a fool will choose to do that. The camel I rode on can't be ugly.

We, the common people are not the activists of a defeated political party, nor we conducted any election. We Just exercise our franchise during elections and want to be ruled by the elected representatives in real sense. So our attitude towards our election system may differ with those of Mr. Kibria and Justice Latifur Rahman.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

When we look back, we find that when the Caretaker system came into being through 14th amendment bill of the constitution, the Awami League leaders seemed contented. The bill was hurriedly prepared by the then ruling BNP and its clauses and sub-clauses were not seriously taken into debate by the oppositions. A voice had been raised but that was too faint to be heard. May be, AL leaders were over-joyed by a big victory they had been struggling to achieve for many months. Mr. Kibria, as the advisor of AL chief and a stalwart of the party could not foresee his present realisation of 'chief Justice manipulation' theory then. Can a diplomat turned politician be so short-sighted?

As for Justice Latifur Rahman, his rejoinder shows that he is an anti Awami League person. He bursts into wrath writing 'After the frustrations from the election results in 2001, the Awami League adopted a political strategy of vilifying the caretaker government under me to mislead people at home and abroad about its popularity, veiling thereby its misdeeds (criminality, corruption and terrorism) which were intolerable to the well meaning voters.'

The rule of Awami League ended up three months earlier the general election of 2001 had taken place. That is, from then on, Awami League has been doing politics being out of power. So, it is needless to explain that the hatred consists in Justice Rahman's mind for Awami League is not a post-election phenomenon. He hates Awami League for its pre-caretaker rule. The question may very much arise: could he maintain neutrality as the head of caretaker government since his mind-set was against Awami League? After all, he is a human being and not a machine.

It is true, frequent amendments in constitution is not graceful for a nation. The saying goes -- when politics fails, the constitution comes. The irony of our politics is, it is always confrontational, not amicable. Elections as the expression of politics are more confrontational. Virtually, not only in Bangladesh, except for some European countries the picture is almost the same with variation of degrees. During last US election, both the Republicans and the Democrats kept themselves alert like war-time in fear of manipulation. Anyway, the amendments in our constitution time and again only indicate the weakness of our politics. This weakness seems to get severe day by day and thus thought to be beyond remedy to many of us. The on-going caretaker reform debate is a by-product of that weakness of our politics.

We do not necessarily want any reform in present caretaker system. If it works properly, why should we? In that case, we ignore what Mr. Kibria suggests on reforms. But how can the BNP leaders say that there is no scope of reforming the caretaker government?

Constitution is not a bible, nor its rigidity should go on for centuries to come. Constitution is meant to be a guide to rule a given society at a given moment of time. It is nothing more, nothing less. Good governance and political stability is necessary, not the constitution itself. In other words, the constitution is a holy booklet not for any spiritual background but for its switches of light when we fall in dark.

Common citizens want free and fair elections, whatever the method to gain it is. Eventually, not only in our caretaker government system, reforms should be made in working method of all our state-organs concerned. Such a vital organ Election Commission may be re-organised widening its jurisdiction and power. The role of administration and law enforcing agencies may also be scientifically re-arranged.

The oppositions have raised their doubts on a fair election. Of them, Awami League alone represents the highest number of people of the country, as it pulled highest popular votes in the last election. So as a matter of fact, ignoring the demand of reforms in caretaker government system of the oppositions will not only create political unrest in the country, it will also make the next election controversial at home and abroad. It is assumed that Awami League and some other oppositions will not participate in the next election under the present form of caretaker government. Such an election may turn suicidal for BNP whatever 'peaceful' that will be. 15th February, 1996 is not too far-off.

Democracy is not merely a kind of rule of majority. It is the rule of majority with the content of minority. It is an art of living together in heterogeneities. So the doubts of the oppositions of unfairness in the next election is not relevant to us. What is important, whether the present government understands the essence of democracy or not.

Mahbub Kamal is a dramatist.