Re-evaluating 1/11
THE changes of January 11 have come under criticism; it is particularly those who had suffered due to various forms of mental and physical duress during the two years of CTG that have taken up the cudgels against 1/11.
It is very interesting to note that the concept of the caretaker system is also coming under attack, particularly from those that were responsible for conceiving the idea. And it is no wonder that the BNP, who was against it initially, but was forced to introduce the system in the face of a very strong political movement by the opposition, wants it to continue. To hear some AL leaders talk now of doing away with the caretaker system is as amusing as listening to the BNP extolling the virtues of the system.
I for one had never made a secret of my position about it. The caretaker system is a reflection of our political immaturity -- we can no longer hide behind the excuse of "nascent state" and "inexperienced polity." If we have not graduated from political infancy to manhood after 38 years, will we ever?
It is also a reflection of the innate animosity and distrust that have motivated the behaviour of the two major parties, both in so far it related to their mutual relationship as also assuming positions on various national issues.
Post facto evaluation of a political issue is inevitable. And one finds nothing wrong in assessing the performance of the CTG. It was a unique arrangement compelled by the political situation. But any suggestion that it was an aberration that should not have happened is rather inane. And that is why one is amused to hear people terming the erstwhile CTG as "so-called" and even illegal. Interestingly, the ranks of the critics are weighted rather heavily towards the AL, the party, its detractors claim, that was the biggest beneficiary of the postponed election.
Those politicians who are crying hoarse must recall the people's perceptions and opinions regarding the change, the vast majority who heaved a sigh of relief at being spared from even more serious consequences of the prevailing unrest in terms of the political dispensation that might have followed, not to speak of a heightened level of political violence.
But it was not that one was not alive to the pitfalls of an unelected government, which may not have been unconstitutional or illegal, but which at the same time could not expect to have an open ended tenure, leaving all to guess the meaning of holding election "as soon as possible."
The relevant provision of the constitution mandates the caretaker government to handover power to an elected government for which the election should be held within ninety days. The extension was validated by the highest court of the country that gave the EC up to December 2008 to hold election to the parliament.
However, even at that time we had cautioned in this very column saying that the government should be aware of the dangers and the consequences of a prolonged tenure of an unelected government, albeit constitutional. Not only was it likely to influence our international relations, particularly with our development partners, an unelected government may not be equipped or prepared to address national issues or problems that might crop up eventually, in the way an elected government can.
It is also disconcerting to note that the blame for the so-called "minus two" formula is being put on certain section of the media. One is not certain who coined the phrase but the idea was certainly not the media's innovation. In fact if one's memory serves one right, the idea of new leadership, restriction of tenure of party chairmanship to two terms, democratisation of political parties, etc were matters that were being talked about by senior members of both the political parties. These gentlemen may have reasons to have gone quite now on the matter, having perhaps fallen out of favour with their party bosses.
It was the people's perception that much of the political woes that we faced were due to the very nature of AL-BNP relationship that was most acrimonious to say the least, and to a large extent the relationship was determined by the personal equation of the leaders of the two parties. And the people did not want to be held hostage to this situation any longer. However, it was not for anybody other than the members of the party to choose their leader.
But not everything was right with 1/11 either. The CTG government had taken too much on its plate that it did not fully deliver. While we will reevaluate the erstwhile CTG later, we cannot end without saying how badly its anti-corruption drive has gone. It was, as we had said before, motivated by considerations other than the honest desire to rid country of corruption. And that is why, while some innocent people have suffered, some, who in public estimate were less than honest, have gone scot-free. We feel sorry on both counts.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments