& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

In Defence of a Parliamentary System of Government

by A. S. H. K. Sadique
THE debate on the appropriate system of government for Bangladesh Is polarizing the political forces in the country which is a bad omen for the future of democracy. In order to bring stability to the democratic Institutions. It Is very important that we develop a national consensus
Truly a presidential form Is not necessarily an undemo cratic system so long It Is elective and representative. I also do not subscribe to the view that this system helps military takeovers The mill tary can surely overthrow a prime minister as it can a president In 1958 in Pakistan Major General Iskander Mirza and General (later Field Marshal) Ayub Khan showed that it was possible. Whenever the personal greed and lust for power of a General Ayub or of a Sergeant Doe (of Liberia) outgrow his boots, he will do it on one pretext or another, regardless of the form of Government.
Presidential election Is an expensive proposition for a candidate. It deprives otherwise competent persons with leadership qualities to become the chief executive of a country without being personally extremely wealthy or dependant on other persons having money and power. Repaying the obligations thus Incurred becomes a major cause for breeding corruption tn future.
The disadvantage of a presidential system does not rest here. A president. In a country like Bangladesh, is easier to manipulate by interested na tionais and by foreigners for their own gains. In a system where the locus of decision making rests on an Individual, he or she tends to build around him or her an economic elite who mainly benefit from the resources raised domestically or Imported from abroad. Even foreign governments may take advantage of the system. We recently saw the spectacle of Bangladesh sending army contingent to Saudi Arabia regardless of the popular sentiment in the country. On the other hand Malaysia, on Islamic state, refused to do so. while at once and rightly condemning the morally and legally indefensible action of Iraq for its armed conquest of the independent state of Kuwait.
In arguments for the democratic character of a presidential system, often the examples of USA and France are given. But this is comparing the incomparables. The US system is based on complete separation of powers. The legislature and the presidency function inde pendently of each other The President does not exercise any authority over the Congress. He can not prorogue or dissolve the Congress The American Constitution in fact goes beyond it. The Congress has a fixed period of life. It can not be dissolved. The present constitution of Bangladesh does not give parliament that kind of privileged independence.
Here the question of political morality is also involved In November 1990 the demo cratic forces had agreed to establish a sovereign parlla ment. Currently interprets tions differ on the meaning of the word "sovereign" Some parties are arguing that sovereign parliament means a parliamentary system of gov ernment. Although the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) leadership is maintain Ing strict silence on the issue.
hopefully to keep their options open, there are voices which are publicly advocating a contrary view. These people do not think that sovereign par liament necessarily means a parliamentary system. But they are not explaining what then the word "sovereign" should stand for. It can not be a mere slogan, ft must have a tangible meaning. If we agree for the sake of argument that the ex pression does not connote a parliamentary system of gover nance. I should think that it means that the president as the chief executive exercises no control whatsoever over It. In effect it should and must mean that the Presidept should not have the powers prorogue or dissolve it. Parliament must have total control (sovereignty) over itself. This is a democratic safeguard against possible autocracy. as also embodied in the American Constitution.
The question is: can such safeguards be prescribed in our Constitution to make parliament really sovereign? What happens if then the presidency and parliament are controlled by opposing political parties? Can a government function in Bangladesh in such a situation? Given our present political environment I should think not The system works in the USA because of political matu rlty of the polity, because the democratic system is not con fined to the superstructure (parliament and president) as In Bangladesh. There is a functioning democracy at every level, from local upwards. The society will not accept for long political irresponsibility of opposition for the sake of oppo sltlon.
What are the options now open to BNP? They have two alternatives to choose from: either to Introduce a parlla mentary system of government where the House through the prime minister and the mem bers controls its own destiny, or continue with the presidential system, but remove presi dentlal prerogative of prorogu ing or dissolving or in any
other way interfering with the working of the parliament. Only then can parliament be called sovereign.
Between these two alternatives, I feel that a parllamen tary system will be politically advantageous to BNP for several reasons. Firstly, a true democratic presidential system with complete separation of powers, is Inherently unstable. as it may create an impasse in government which we can 111 afford. Even a modified system where president and parliament share powers, where the president retains the prerogative to dissolve parliament, there will occur instability as a president will be prone to dissolve one parliament after another, as often as the opposition gets control. Alternatively, a president will try to influence the electoral process: thus the seed of autocracy and political corruption is sown.
Secondly, assuming BNP wins the coming presidential election, will it be strategically good pollUcs for the BNP-President to assume total responsibility for all the actions of the government that is inherent in the present presidential system? The problems facing the country is enormous. The economy is in ruins; the financial system needs basic reorientation; the society is in a firmament; and the administration Is in doldrums Moreover, is the present government sure of full cooperation from the bureaucracy? The toppling of General Ershad from power has bred frustration among many in the secretariat, the departments, the field offices, public corporations. and other government agencies. There are persons, although small in numbers, in crucial governmental positions. who are smarting under the changed circumstances of lost power and prestige that they enjoyed during the last nine years. They are not going to forgive the democratic forces. Including BNP. Although they will, and are currently trying to sneak into the good graces of BNP and other democratic parties, but knowing the people tn government and the process, I have no hesitation to believe that they will try to subvert the government and may even succeed The vast majority of the bureaucracy Is no doubt neutral. but only passively so They
can not be a countervailing force, especially because of their accustomed passive neutrality. against the active few.
In thia situation it is obviously advisable for BNP to establish a system where powers as well as responsibUttles are. legally, morally and in the public eye. shared by several persons collectively, to avoid a situation where the public ire is drawn to one focal point, the presidency.
Thirdly, one could ask an obvious question. Why should BNP give up its present advantage of a working majority in the Parliament and go for the uncertainty of another election? Does the voting pattern in the recently held parliamentary election Justify an overriding confidence in winning the ensuing presidential election against a possibly combined opposition candidate? I. for one, did not notice any overwhelming majority for BNP in the recently cast votes.
1 have heard questions raised about the mandate of the people. Did they really vote for a parllamen tary system? To my mind the question to a non starter The people did vote form it actually takes. a matter
eretee which the leaden must undertake. The leaders must not only be responsive to peo pie they must also lead They should lead by actions; they should lead with ideas. The people of course will retain the right to accept or reject these ideas periodically, through elections.
Although the present parliament has given BNP a working majority, there may be occasions in future when no single party wins a clear majority. The resultant uncertainty. In our present political climate, to bound to feed the dreams of non democratic forces. One democracy has taken root, society will take this kind of situation tn its stride. But our experience of the recent past and pervasive poverty Is not the best foundation for this type of even temporary Instability In order to avoid immediate collapse of government I suggest the following special provisions tn the Constitution together with a form of government that to
fully responsible to parliament
Usually a successful no confidence motion or defeat in money or important bills leads to resignation of the govern ment with two alternative consequences. The Parliament may be dissolved on the advice of the resigning prime minister (which should be obligatory on the president) or the prime minister may advice the President to call upon the opposition to form the next government. When due to multi-plicMy of parties there Is no clear majority, this kind of situation may often occur.
In order to avoid frequent dissolution of parliament, the Constitution should provide that the prime minister will not be obliged to resign if the opposition fails to muster enough strength to form an alternative government. This will however be effective for the first two years of the life of a parliament. Additionally, there must be provision for the prime minister and the cabinet to obtain a vote of confidence when the government is taittally inducted. The
tary party “f '
a, <4
to provide that If after a vote of confidence to obtained, the fe-der L ... the prime minister
the prime minister may give an obligatory advice to the President to dissolve the par lament and hold fresh efee ttons. This provtoton can also be made effective for the first THs'Tw ho*pXllyP*^^1L house political coups and strengthen the hands of a prime minister to effectively administer the country.
The President will be allowed only one term, will be fully symbolic with no constitutional prerogatives to interfere in the functioning of the gov-
A prime minister's tenure should also be limited to two consecutive terms and not more than ten years tn all.
1 propose a rethinking on the present system of election of members of parliament. It could continue to be on single constituency basis, but the winning candidate must be required to obtain a clear (50% plus) majority of votes cast. If none does, there will be a runoff election between the two highest vote getting candidates. This will eliminate minor and non-serious parties and independents who might contest to divide votes or take chance. They may even be discouraged to file nomination papers. Although It to expensive. it is advisable in the political context of Bangladesh. This will lead to stability after a period. The reelection must be held within 15 days to stop another round of expensive campaigning.
It Is possible that these provisions can be misused. But then all democratic institutions can be misused by unscrupulous persons. This Is no political system which can fully guarantee against the rise of autocracy. Only that the people should be alert against It
The author is a former Secretary (Industry. Defense, etc.) to the Government of Bangladesh and a former UNIDO advisor on industrial development for the Asia and Pacific region. He also served as the Principal Secretary to the President, Mr. Justice Abu Sayeed Chowdhury.