Caretaker government: Reform or no reform?

Prime Minister Khaleda Zia and some other ministers are saying that AL want to create anarchy in the country realising that they can not win the next election. BNP are of the opinion that AL never accept defeat in election but when they win everything is right. They say that the last election was held under a president, a chief election commissioner and three election commissioners who were all appointed by the AL and still AL and ex-PM Sheikh Hasina have accused all of them of conspiracy for AL's defeat in the election. Therefore BNP thinks AL other opposition parties have no genuine demand and they are only moving towards disrupting the next general election.

If the above two opposing views are taken into consideration, it can be seen that both the opposing camps have some arguments in their favour and in the opinion of a neutral observer, possibly the arguments of BNP will receive more points than that of AL.ÊNow what BNP can do under the circumstances? Well, BNP can ignore the demand for reform and go for the coming election as per the constitutional provisions or they can sit with the opposition and work out an acceptable formula for the election.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Let's see what BNP can gain from the two opposing options. BNP can go for and become successful in holding the election. BNP and allies will get at least 3/4th of the seats in the absence of participation by AL and its allies (which they are saying). BNP and its allies will comfortably form the next government. But what happens then? Can such an election get legitimacy in the eyes of the people and the world? The answer is -- of course not. Can BNP govern with a clear conscience? The answer is also-- no. Unrest and agitation will start from the first day of their governance. BNP can look back to see the fate of a similar election conducted by them and get the answer by themselves.

On the other hand BNP and its allies have everything to gain from an election acceptable to all as they think they are going to win the next election in view of their better electoral alliance and in the absence of a responsible behaviour from AL during the last few years. This nation will heave a sigh of relief if BNP abandon hard line and work out an acceptable formula with the opposition. There is an opinion prevailing among considerable number of people that AL would not have succeeded in coming to power had BNP embraced caretaker concept in time. There were reports in the press in those turbulent days of 1995 that Khaleda Zia advised Jamaat's Motiur Rahman Nijami to talk anything but 'caretaker', when a delegation led by him met the then PM Khaleda to press for the demand of a government. The rest is history and they should learn from the history.

It is unfortunate that Begum Khaleda Zia is perhaps making it difficult by rejecting the reforms demand outright. She is a political leader, she should know that. She could have easily said that BNP would examine the proposals when AL and other parties place them. Our law minister Moudud

Ahmed says, "Caretaker government is a settled issue and one of the basics of the constitution". The minister should remember that election under an elected government was a settled issue and was one of the basics of the constitution but BNP had to go for 13th amendment to undo that settled issue and that basics in the greater need of the country. Moudud Ahmed will justify his job if he provides genuine advice to his leader and the party.

There is a whispering going on in some circles that BNP will drag its feet on the reform proposals as they are confident that the would be next caretaker chief can be persuaded to withdraw through back channel negotiation. Such type of thinking will do no good to the country as the very system of choosing the caretaker chief from the immediate past chief justice has become an embarrassment to the nation's highest court and also to that person concerned. A few days ago respectable former chief justice Mr. Mustafa Kamal has spoken about this particular aspect of embarrassment, as reported in The Daily Star. Besides, selecting the chief election commissioner and other election commissioners through consensus and giving more power and authority to make the election commission truly independent and powerful are very important indeed.

The option of selecting the caretaker chief should better be limited to the past chief justices only. Options should not be wider as there is a danger of a deadlock due to our political culture of opposing each other's view. A wider choice could give rise to wider disagreements which can simply be a very disturbing scenario for the President in that interim period, in the absence of an elected government. A crystal clear guideline has to be in place so that if a consensus choice cannot be made, a former chief justice who has the support of the majority parties representing the last parliament will become the caretaker chief.

A proposal of taking away the defence portfolio from the President and entrusting it to the caretaker chief is being circulated by certain quarters. This is most unfortunate. These people are placing their trust to an unknown person instead of the Presidency. A President holds a unique position in the system of a parliamentary democracy like ours. We should look to India to see how powerful their President becomes when a crisis appears in respect of the formation of a new government. The whole world will laugh if we tend to portray our president as a person who cannot be trusted. Some say, a president is appointed by a certain party. Of course there will always be persons holding offices, selected by a certain party but if every selection is questioned, Bangladesh as a country just cannot function. These people have forgotten that AL had come to power under a caretaker government when Presidency was held by a person named Abdur Rahman Biswas, elected by BNP and who always was by AL disliked. Mr. Biswas did nothing or could do nothing to prevent the victory of AL in the polls even after he crushed a coup bid by the then army chief and appointed another general in his place before the election.

Coming back to reform, people in general feel that BNP will be smart enough to go for reforms in the greater interest of the country. It is unfortunate that when a party remains in power it thinks everything is alright everywhere. AL thought so while in power and did not change a single thing and BNP now in power is also thinking so and do not want to change a single thing. As these reform proposals in no way would put BNP in a disadvantageous position, it is hoped the government would change their hard line in working out an acceptable formula with the opposition for the holding of a meaningful election.

ATM Murshid Alam, previously served various organisations in various capacities now a businessman.