Floundering political reform
PRESENTLY it appears that there is nothing more detestable to, or more maligned by, the leadership of the major political parties than the word "reform." It creates a sort of a pathological discomfort even to have the word mentioned, let alone considered seriously and acted upon.
Not only has it attained a disreputable character, but also the party chief has sidelined the reformists within the AL. And those belonging to the same school of thought in the BNP face the same fate (that is what one could make out from the threat held out by a senior BNP following the AL council meeting).
Everything on the reform front has gone quiet. But reform with more bias towards reform of political parties, has been a popular demand.
During the Oct 2006 and Dec 2008 interregnum we had called for internal reform of the political parties because of the near autocratic manner in which the country had been run, particularly during the 4-Party alliance regime. It was the result of absolute power residing in the hands of the party chief, who either lacked the sagacity to differentiate between the government and the party, and between the party and the country, or deliberately diluted the difference for self- aggrandisement. But it was also clear to all of us that reform and change within the party are things that have to be internalised by the party leaders as well as its grassroots workers and not something that can be imposed upon from the outside.
It may interest the readers to know that one senior AL politician had unhesitatingly admitted in 2007 that behind all the woes that the nation had been suffering from were the politicians' follies, both as individuals and collectively as political entities. And he went so far as to suggest then that he would rather have the next three years used to cleanse the system of all the bad cholesterol, so that the choked polity could be reinvigorated with fresh blood.
What one notices now is a fear psychosis amongst the same crop of senior leaders that keeps them from even broaching the issue at this time. It is not surprising that it is so, given the fate they have suffered and what might be in store for the BNP reformists. It unfortunately confirms our fears that we had expressed then. We had hoped that their position on reform was motivated by their conviction rather than by any extraneous influence. As we had feared, their pronouncements were only rhetoric, an expedient only to ward off pressures from the power that was at that time.
The AL council meeting was a disappointment to those that had hoped to see a display of intra- party democratic culture from one of the oldest political parties in the country. What was even more distressing was that the protagonists of political reform failed to stand by their conviction. They not only failed to communicate their point of view to the party chief, some of them were seen meekly supporting the manner and the method of "election" and "selection" to the various party posts and the way the council was conducted.
And as for the councilors, while we appreciate their unflinching faith in the party boss, their exuberance in willing to forgo their democratic right to elect the members of the committees indicates a weak and subdued mentality with no desire at all to express their opinion on important issues concerning the party. What does it bode for party democracy?
Perhaps there is no credible alternative to the current chairman of the AL and she is eminently suited to hold the party together. And what the more than 5,000 AL councilors did was an expression of loyalty to their chairperson. However, loyalty is a good thing but reposing all the powers in one person does not further the cause of collective decision making, which is the essence of democracy, whatever else it may help the party to achieve.
While Sheikh Hasina was elected uncontested, and nobody expected otherwise, we have the JP (Ershad) party chief expressing his desire to hold the mantle of the party chief for the rest of his life. Although the JP has curtailed the authority of the party president to act on his or her own, but can there be anything more ridiculous than to think that one is indispensable for the party, and that one can run the party intelligently even beyond the age of senility? As for the BNP, we are waiting eagerly to see what surprises it has in store for the country in its council meeting.
Change is a part of life, and change for the better indicates the vibe and dynamism of a system. The current British prime minister, immediately on taking over had suggested reforms in 12 major areas cutting the authority of the government, and in certain cases the chief executive, while investing more power in the House. Will the long overdue reform in our politics and polity, on which we had noticed a convergence of view among political parties, ever come to pass?
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments