|
The stark realities in the political scene of Bangladesh provide no grounds for joy. The political process or the political figures have not undergone in the least the metamorphosis in their conduct and thinking that conscious and well intentioned sections of countrymen have been urging for a long time.
Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) issued a report sometime ago. It analyzed the performance of the eighth parliament of Bangladesh but its aims really were to highlight the quality or character of people's representatives or members of parliaments (MPs). The report underscored that in its assessment most of the MPs in the present parliament came to it riding the power of black money. They were, therefore, unable or unwilling to work for the public good and people in general seemed to be deeply disillusioned with such persons who posed as their representatives.
The TIB report was no doubt a timely and useful one . But it is hardly ground-breaking in the sense that the grave malaises noted in it were identified long ago and have been troubling the nation's conscience. The last held general election in 2001 could go down as an important milestone in the evolution of democracy in Bangladesh . But unfortunately, this did not happen.
A lot is being written and talked about this aspect. Perhaps, the same will make an impact somewhere down the road in the future. But meanwhile, the political process in Bangladesh remains stuck in the dirty quagmire of black money, the influence of such money, greed and utter lack of responsibility on the part of the leaders who could act decisively to make a difference.
A leading light of one of the main political parties threatened resignation from it on the eve of the 2001 parliamentary election . In a statement to the press on that occasion and giving his reaction to developments in politics or within his party, he made no secret of his very great disillusionment with its leadership and the political system. He underlined that he worked wholeheartedly to work as an agent of change in his party but expressed his complete inability to change set attitudes and instincts. Therefore, as a mark of protest he decided to withdrew from the party's activities because the same clashed with his moral sensibilities.
Charges were leveled against the leaders of that party for buying and selling nominations. Allegedly, the nomination of that party was sold for taka 10 million each and if this calculation was to be believed, then an amount of some taka 3 billion was received by the leadership of that party from such activities. The allegation could be exaggerated. But even if it had considerable substance, then the same was enough to show how the election turned out to be a grossly distorted process where ideology, commitment, service to people or constituencies, etc., were no issues for consideration when confronted by money power.
Not only the above gentleman, leaders of the party in focus did not nominate for the election at that time many of their veteran colleagues well known for their relatively cleaner background. The places of the dropped persons were taken over by completely new faces in some cases and more than integrity and devotion to the party's ideals, the main consideration for nominating them was the huge amounts they allegedly paid underhand for such nominations. In many constituencies, senior partymen were not nominated to make way for businessmen with bank loan defaulter backgrounds, businessmen with suspected links to smuggling, former corrupt bureaucrats, armymen and others, the joiners in the last minute in that party's bandwagon with various motives and for ego satisfaction.
Understandably, many senior people or former MPs of this party who did not get nominations suffered a sense of being humiliated or deprived. Some of them had a sound track record of devoted work in their constituencies, they remained strongly committed to party ideology and by all canons of fairness deserved to be nominated by their party. Most of them were even informally assured of their nominations till the last minute when nominations were practically snatched away from them to be given to individuals who approached the party in the final hour. Allegedly , the main factor that enabled them to clinch the nominations was their ability to pay handsome amounts to that powerful group in the party who could ' manage' the nominations for them.
Not only in that party, the money game in deciding nominations was loudly alleged also in its main opponent party. There was no shortage of disgruntled persons in that opponent party who carried a deep sense of hurt that in terms of working selflessly for the party, for representing it successfully in the past as MPs, for adhering stoutly to the party's ideology and for retaining the backing of maximum number of party workers in their respective constituencies, they should have received the nominations of their party. But they were denied the nominations and the same went to last minute joiners of the party whose qualification in the main was that they could contribute head-spinning amounts to the party coffers which really were no better than bribes to ensure their nominations.
What are the consequences of this trend of nomination buying and selling ? It should be obvious. The highest political leaders in the main parties were supposed to play very conscious and alert roles of gatekeepers in the election to ensure that the undesirable ones -- meaning those with black money and the influence of such money -- would not crash the gates to find access to the national parliament . But the leaders most insensitively betrayed this great expectation of the people. In the process, they nipped in the bud the prospects of getting a better parliament or a cleaner parliament to work toward nationally important objectives.
Bank loan defaulters and front men of crime syndicates, on becoming MPs or getting elected as people's representative at lower levels, are not expected to work for national goals. They could be expected to work to preserve and promote financial and other crimes. It was most unfortunate that bodies like TIB through their researches have established that the criminalisation of politics which has been gradually engulfing our political parties, instead of witnessing a setback, became all the more entrenched through the process of the last held general election and other representative elections.
Therefore, the pertinent question was whether the citizens could expect any qualitative change of governance for the better after the election. It seemed that it would make no difference which of the two major parties in Bangladesh won the contest or even if a coalition took over after the election. The political process in Bangladesh was too degraded and the people were being offered no good choice between good and evil. Thus, politics in this country has become hostage considerably to black money and immoral leadership .
Political parties are at the heart of a democratic system. The benefits of democracy through good governance cannot be realised as long as these parties are not sufficiently cleansed and made competent to serve people's interest. So much of concern is aired everyday by conscious quarters in the country as well as by the donors for good governance . But this good governance can be attained in some measures only through the carrying out of political reforms to make the political system fit enough to deliver good governance.
The reforms must be carried out essentially in the political parties. Pressure from civil society should be built up on the parties to change their present constitutions that provide excessive powers to individuals. The parties themselves should be made more democratic in running their affairs so that individuals or coteries in them cannot dominate party affairs. Openness, transparency, accountability and equality in running the parties can create opportunities for truly devoted persons to acquire leadership positions in the parties on the basis of their merit and character and not on the basis of pedigree or cult. The parties must be persuaded to adopt rules and strictly adhere to them that none would be made a candidate for election on the basis of his or her financial contribution to party funds. Receipt of financial contributions from persons or institutions of questionable backgrounds must be strictly monitored and blocked. The gaining of instant party membership ! with donations must be barred.
Similar pressure must be built up on the parties to give convincing proof that they desire an effective parliament. The press and other forums that create public opinion should act in concert to exert stronger pressure on the parties to work for an effective parliament.
|