Presidency needs to be more than symbolic
CONGRATULATIONS to the 19th president of Bangladesh, and I wish him long life and good health, needless to say, a full and successful term in office. May I say let bygones be bygones. We need a twist in the presidency.
I am not unhappy with the choice of this president. He has got what he deserved, rewarded for being a longtime party loyalist, one of its respectable old guards. But, all said, it's time to strengthen the office of the president. It should be given more power and vigour, instead of being a grazing ground for figureheads. We should make Bangabhaban more than a 54-acre preserve which confines a lonely soul, whose role is as ceremonial as the 21 gun salutes or cannon shots fired on Independence Day.
The role of the president ought to be more. No need to change the constitution if the parliamentary form of government does the job. So I say, keep the presidency a symbolic role. The president will appoint ambassadors and high commissioners, and receive their credentials from foreign countries. He will grace university convocations as chancellor. He will grant pardons, reprieves, respite or remission of punishment. And then wait for his chance to promulgate emergency so that he can spring to life like reserve forces called to active duty.
But next time we should improve on how we symbolise the symbol. We need to look for a president who will be the conscience of the country and a unifying force at the same time. What we saw in the past is that the role of a president, however nominal in normal times, can make a difference in the times of trouble. Hence, my humble submission. We need a strong president in ordinary times for him to rise to extraordinary occasions.
To some extent, a role is like a limb. It atrophies if kept unused. I don't mean to say that the president needs to become more powerful than the prime minister. But a president should know and believe in his heart that he is the ultimate custodian of the constitution, that he is the president of the whole country, irrespective of its factional contentions. The people and the country should be his utmost consideration, not the beck and call of those who land him the job.
A president needs to be groomed, if this is what one must call it. He needs to be groomed for office and groomed for power so that he understands the obligation of being the head of state. Mahatma Gandhi claims that the obligation of accepting a position of power is to be, above all else, a good human being. A president needs to be a good human being, virtuous and competent. Before that, cut the cloth according to the coat. The job needs to expand in order to fit in a larger man, who will represent not a symbol of power but the power of a symbol.
Different folks need different strokes. We need a president who will be above politics and beyond partisan reproach, a strict adherent of the constitution. Yes, we want a competent man, but competence without virtue is a deadly thing. It simply makes one more effective at wrongdoing. We also need a president who should take pride in his job, and won't use his office as a springboard for sordid gains. More privilege means more responsibility. A president guilty of wrongdoing will be readily impeached.
We want a presidency which combines showmanship with statesmanship. British comic writer Douglas Adams once quipped that anyone who was capable of getting himself made president should on no account be allowed to do the job. The presidency in a parliamentary system is an absurd wedge between obscurity and fame. It's the highest office with the lowest visibility, except for national ceremonies and state functions. Right now, it's a high maintenance, low performance job.
We need to save our presidency from being a rubber stamp. The president should be more than a mere tool in the hands of the ruling party, a toy wound up with loyalty to make its wish his command. It's a national institution, which enshrines the responsibility of defending the constitution. It's also reposed with the trust to perform the most delicate functions of democracy by checking the balance and balancing the check. Within his restricted role, a president must be a stalwart for the nation.
I repeat my submission. We should look for a different type of person. The presidency isn't a favour that should go to the most favourite person. It's not an opportunity for the hardest seeker, not a compromise for the least controversial. The job and the person should fit each other. The next president should elevate the job no less than it should elevate him.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments