Mostafa Kamal MajumderThe Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) has recommended the enactment of a special law to ban ‘Parliament boycott’ by MPs on ‘partisan grounds’, according to a news item published in different national dailies today the 3rd of June 2013. The graft watchdog has also called for amendment to the Constitution to reduce the maximum period of absence from parliament sessions by MPs, the report says.This observation by TIB is definitely well-intentioned, because all the people of Bangladesh want to see their elected legislature to pulsate with life and work for the improvement of the quality of their life. One however has to note that the TIB has clearly delved into a political domain as against its mandate to probe graft or transparency.
The new TIB report, titled ‘Parliament Watch’, released at a press conference in Dhaka city, contains these recommendations. Focussing on the fact that the main opposition BNP has so far boycotted 93 percent of the sitting days from the 8th to the 15th session of the present Parliament, the report has observed, “This culture of parliament boycott has no parallel to the democratic practices observed all across the globe. On one hand, it’s upsetting, and, on the other hand, it’s equally an indication of lack of respect to the vote and verdict of the people.”
TIB has recommended amendment of Article 67 of the Constitution to reduce the provision of allowing an MP absence for 90 consecutive sitting days, said Iftekharuzzaman. He observed that the prolonged absence of the opposition from parliament reflects that politics in the country has gradually become something like a zero-sum game for the parties. The TIB executive director has rightly noted, “Boycott of parliament is not acceptable either from the political point of view, or from the aspects of democratic practices. The practice doesn’t exist in any other country in the world.”
He has also brilliantly stated that “There’s no problem with the opposition walking out of Parliament even 10 times a day. It’s widely practiced allover the world. But they can’t really boycott parliament… it’s quite upsetting and unprecedented in democratic practices allover the world.”
The TIB report however falls short of a very important aspect that it has not studied the causes of ‘Parliament boycott’. As reported, in response to a query whether the TIB report has some reflection on the causes shown by the opposition in support of the boycott, Iftekharuzzaman said the causes were not studied. The failure to study the causes is not only a lapse, it’s a blunder. Because, the TIB, having some credence in the anti-graft area, should build on the same, instead of letting people down on other scores. A society to become big needs tireless efforts of watchdogs to keep people in the corridors of power on track and transparent. But a recommendation should be based on a firm footing. A prescription should not be given to undo an effect without addressing its cause. Because this medicine would not work as it would not go to the core – the cause of the ailment. Not even a seasoned doctor makes a prescription without asking for proper investigation of ailments that a patient complains of. More careful physicians are extra cautious to tell their patients to get pathological examinations done only from laboratories that are considered reliable. But TIB has not even attempted an investigation of the cause, not to talk about veracity of investigation that remains out of question.
Ours is a society mostly of talkers, with the least of listeners. If restrictions on freedom expression does not stop people, everybody should be tired of everybody else. There is a popular saying that every adult person in Bangladesh is a doctor and has at least some drugs to prescribe if somebody talks about his ailment. The late editor of now-defunct The Bangladesh Times Shahidul Huq once shared with this writer one of his interesting experiences as the Chief Reporter of the Pakistan Observer before the liberation of Bangladesh. After going through a statement issued by the then general secretary of the Awami League, Tajuddin Ahmed, Shahidul Huq felt the AL leader made some remarks that are possibly not consistent with the lines of thought of his party, and made a phone call to the AL general secretary to communicate the same. Tajuddin Ahmed retorted, ‘Shahid Saheb you journalists please do your journalism. Leave the job of politics to us who are full time politicians.” Pakistan Observer that Shahidul Huq worked for at that time played the leading role in championing the cause of provincial autonomy and established itself as the most read English newspaper overtaking the government trust-run The Morning News.
Boycott of Parliament sessions, not ‘Parliament Boycott’, is not a peculiar development associated with the present opposition parties led by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). The TIB has correctly termed it as a culture, that has grown over the years. The causes of this culture merit full-fledged scrutiny. The causes must differ from party to party, from period to period and even from Parliament to Parliament – if not from government to government.
With some claim to share of the credit taken by social watchdog organisations like the TIB, because they base their findings on reports published in newspapers produced by journalists like us, may I draw attention to the fact that boycott of Parliament sessions is not a legal, but a political, problem and should be addressed politically. If democracy does not bring tolerance of and mutual respect for each other by the government and the opposition there is a danger that it will fail. Unfortunately we have the record of such failures of the past right from the time of Pakistan again, again and again. Our success of democracy since 1991 lies only in the fact that since then all elected governments have completed their 5-year terms, despite these chronic boycott of sessions. The semblance stability thus established also helped the economic growth rate to be higher than before. But credible elections that helped create the semblance of this stability making the people to disregard complaints by the defeated parties that those elections were rigged, now look difficult by a significant section of the population.
With the opposition complaining that the change of framework for credible elections is a major threat of instability and newspaper poll reports showing 90 per cent of respondents believing the change was unwelcome, watchdogs or thinks like TIB may kindly concentrate on the building blocks that have been put together to construct our edifice of democracy so far do not fall apart. They must go more deep instead of targeting at unfortunately cheap political popularity that might lead to the creation of mistaken premises. Arguments based on mistaken premises are then bound to lead to dangerously mistaken conclusions.
In our system of politics the government or the party winning support of a majority of seats in Parliament takes all political loaves and fishes. The opposition is left to the streets. Even in Parliament constituencies won by the opposition all activities developmental, political or social, are controlled by the party in power. If we accept TIB’s recommendation to ban boycott of Parliament sessions, would we not give power to the ruling party to dictate even political decisions of the opposition!
In an ideal democracy as the United Kingdom, institutions function democratically even without a written constitution. It’s the democratic spirit and the mindset that matter not the legal compulsions. TIB should ponder as to whether its hurriedly prepared suggestions on a serious matter would actually be a recipe of disaster for democracy. We should add more building blocks instead of removing those that have already been unanimously put in place. So it’s better not to make half baked prescriptions. Such recommendations would lead the nation to nowhere.
(A journalist of international repute the writer is the editor of The New Nation and has extensive experience in covering proceedings of Parliament)
Related Posts
