Strategically Speaking
Avoid perceptions becoming a reality
Delwar Hussain -- leader of a faction of the BNP (pro-Khaleda, as commonly designated) -- has asked for the resignation of the CEC and the other two commissioners. He feels that the current EC has lost its credibility by sticking to its position regarding the leadership question of the party, having invited Saifur group to attend the political dialogue which the EC is holding with the major parties. Equally disconcerting is the fact that this faction of the party feels that the caretaker government is "making a blueprint for the upcoming election and working towards achieving the goal of holding the election in line with that blueprint." That is the belief Mr. Hussian holds, and whatever rationale his view is based upon, and even if one were not to agree with his opinion, that he feels the EC has attained a partisan character by its conduct vis a vis the BNP, and that it is no longer capable of holding a free, fair and impartial election, is definitely a cause for concern. It is the first time that a major political party has formally taken such a stand since the EC was reconstituted. For an impartial observer, such a perception openly expressed by a major political party has serious portends that might put the prospect of holding the much awaited election in jeopardy. If that apprehension were to come to pass, then one feels that the EC has a good deal to answer for it. The EC has taken the ruling of the High Court Division on a BNP faction writ regarding the first invitation letter of the EC sent to Major (Retd) Hafiz, Secretary General (of the Saifur faction) BNP, in support of its position regarding the EC stance on the BNP leadership. The EC's choice of the addressee of its first invitation letter is also based on flawed rationale. And one cannot be faulted for thinking that the EC has been, wittingly or unwittingly, involved in the BNP's intra-party feud. The EC's explanation for inviting Major Hafiz for the first round of talks is as unconvincing as is its move to invite the same faction again for the next round of dialogue -- since the court ruling is in no way redemption of the EC position on the leadership issue of the BNP. And the recent court ruling does in no way validate the EC stance that Major Hafiz is the lawful SG of the BNP. In fact, the court has not adjudicated on the leadership question of the BNP, rather very wisely, skirted the issue by ruling that it was a matter internal to the party and not for the court to pass judgment upon. The EC cannot lose sight of the fact that it has a very onerous responsibility brought upon by the changed circumstances of January 2007. While for any Election Commission holding of elections is the only major responsibility, for Mr. Huda and his team the next election is not just any election. He is supposed to give the country a fair election but with the rider that all the necessary electoral reforms should have been put in place before the election is held. And there is no need to remind him of what he has himself seen as his bounden duty, a responsibility that can only cast them in his own words as "national betrayer" if left unfulfilled. And that is why the EC-political party dialogue to thrash out the details for bringing in appropriate amendments to the Representation of the People's Order 1972 is so important. The BNP issue has unfortunately stunted the dialogue process, and that is what causes concern to all those that would like to see an election that would embark Bangladesh politics on a new road and hopefully a new phase of political development. It is a regrettable matter that the EC in the past had not acquitted itself well to the expectation of the people. The last CEC and his actions before he was removed had done everything to bring a most important democratic institution of the country to the nadir of disrepute. And most because of his actions that appeared to be following a particular plan to fulfill the ulterior objective of a particular party that caused its credibility to slide to the rock bottom. He had cared a fig for the law or for the moral ground that such institutions are based upon and are supposed to uphold. It is not for the EC to get involved either in party matters or to play a part in the resolution of a political party's internal discord. It must go by the law of the land and by its moral dictates. It would not be wrong to suggest that insofar as its handling of the BNP invitation for dialogue is concerned the EC has been able to conform to neither. In all fairness, both the factions should have been invited for the sake of taking forward the reform issues. No further delay can be brooked in finalising the reforms, since no election will be credible without the election taking place under not only an amended people's representative order, but also an improved set of provisions related to elections and participation therein. Neither a botched election nor an election that is not participatory will do for us. And that is possible only if those that are responsible for ensuring the right conditions and appropriate environment for a free and fair election go about their business with transparency and freedom of action. Anything that militates against that must be resisted by the EC. And even more importantly, the EC must avoid giving the impression that its actions are motivated by considerations other than the one that is obligated by the need to hold a free and fair election. All other issues must be secondary if at all. The moral high ground that an institution like the EC stands upon must not be lost by actions deemed by many as less than transparent. It cannot have its credibility questioned. There is no doubt that a negative perception about EC intentions exist among certain quarters. It must do everything to prove that perception wrong. The author is Editor, Defence & Strategic Affairs, The Daily Star.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments