Time to call

What a difference five years make. Right about now, I bet that the Latifur Rahman caretaker government is looking pretty good to the AL in comparison to the current one, and even the general public is somewhat taken aback by the crudity and obviousness of Iajuddin's machinations.

Let us recall that nothing Latifur Rahman, who perhaps is feeling a little vindicated (if not down-right smug) these days, did was in contravention of his council of advisers. He held meetings, listened to their opinions, and they acquiesced with all his decisions. It was this, more than anything else, that convinced the general public that he was on the level.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

But Iajuddin's tenure has been quite different. His insistence on acting unilaterally and summarily over-ruling his advisers is unprecedented. The fact that things reached such a crisis point that four of the advisers went to the extent of resigning from the caretaker government in frustration this week is also quite unprecedented and should indicate that there is something seriously amiss.

It is axiomatic. It shouldn't need to be pointed out that if decisions are taken by the entire council of advisers collectively, that they should be carried out, and that it is unlawful and, to be perfectly blunt, unconstitutional for the president/chief adviser to countermand them. But from the very beginning, this has been the pattern.

This observation brings us to a second rather unhappy feature of Iajuddin's tenure: his observable penchant for time-wasting. The latest reports are that he has made a U-turn and will apparently now consent to send the election commissioners Zakaria and Mudabbir on leave and has put the army on "stand-by."

This is all well and good. But the fact is that with the constitutional clock ticking, it is the height of irresponsibility for him to take decisions one day and roll them back the next. If this was what was going to happen, then the actions should have done taken right away.

Again, the contrast with Latifur Rahman is striking. Latifur Rahman wasted not a moment of the 90 days that he had. There was no incessant putting off of the other advisers. There were no interminable delays. There was no postponement of meetings. He had done his homework and did not issue orders one day and then revoke them the next.

Some are of the opinion that the four advisers should not have resigned. However, it seems to me that they had no choice. The simple fact of the matter is that the president/chief adviser has been unconstitutionally usurping the authority of the council of advisers, has treated his advisers with contempt and disrespect, and that he is moving full speed ahead towards elections that will not be free and fair. In this situation, as conscientious and self-respecting members of the government, what else could they do?

If it was not possible for them to make their voices heard, and it wasn't, then to stay would have made them complicit in the president's machinations. If they felt that the caretaker government could not preside over free and fair elections, and this is indeed what they felt, then it was their bounden duty to resign.

But the question is: where do we go from here?

Let's get down to brass tacks. In the time left to us, given the composition of the EC and the state of the voter roll and the actions of the president/chief adviser, either it is possible to hold free and fair elections, or it is not.

Now, we all want elections. But we also need to be realistic. This is not the time to let our optimism or utopianism or innate belief in the goodness of our fellow man blind us to the reality of the situation. We need to be hard-headed and coldly rational in our analysis.

To my mind, the chances of good elections were slim to begin with. We had 90 days to fix the voter list and institute the necessary reforms, all assuming that the will to do all this existed. This process has barely advanced an inch. We now have some 40-odd days left, and it seems to me highly improbable, especially given the evident mind-set of the president/chief adviser.

Given the fact that precious little has been done in terms of the transfer of administrative and police personnel and reconstitution of the EC, and with the president's political inclinations and lack of shame when it comes to pleasing his political masters in the open for all to see, I can understand how the four advisers came to the conclusion that the way forward was a dead-end.

It seems clear to me, and I believe, to most fair-minded observers, that we have come to the point where we cannot trust Iajuddin to preside over credible elections. It remains possible, theoretically, that elections might turn out well, but this would be despite the president's best efforts, not because of them, and it does not seem to me wise to put one's faith in such a fortuitous eventuality.

The opposition is caught in a Catch-22 situation. The temptation to contest elections, even questionable elections, is obviously great, and this would save the nation much anxiety and uncertainty. But, at the same time, it must ask itself what would be gained and what would potentially be lost by following this course of action.

But if the opposition wants elections without Iajuddin, it will have to have the courage of its conviction that his position is untenable and that elections under his supervision are unacceptable. It will have to spear-head a people's movement for his ouster. If four advisers have had the courage to resign and thus given their vote of no-confidence in the president/chief adviser, perhaps the time has come. But, either way, it's a risky call.

If this were a poker game, it would be time for both sides to lay their cards on the table and see what the other is holding. The 14-party alliance has called a grand rally in Dhaka on December 18. I guess we'll know soon enough, one way or the other.

Zafar Sobhan is Assistant Editor, The Daily Star.