& 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

Talking Polls and Beyond

’The government is on its knees’
A.S.M. Shahjahan was born in Noakhali in 1941. He obtained MCom degree in combined commerce from Dhaka University. He joined Pakistan police service in 1966. Shahjahan served as IGP from 1992-1996, and later as youth and sports secretary from 1996-1999. He served as education and youth and sports adviser to the caretaker government in 2001. He also served as vice-chancellor of Asia Pacific University from 2001-2003. Shahjahan is a member of Shushashoner Jonnoy Nagorik, a senior adviser of UNDP, and chairman of the advisory board of Coordinating Council for Human Rights. Shamim Ashraf took the interview.
What are the advancements since 1/11?
1/11 saved us from hell, but it could not take us to heaven as we dreamt. Among the positive changes are separation of judiciary from the executive, boosting up of ACC and giving autonomy to EC, giving some neutrality to the administration and law enforcing agencies, which were gravely politicised, and reorganising thePSC.
But the main task of the government, which is to help the EC hold the general elections, suffered as the CTG took many things beyond that. The CTG didn't do the registration of parties and holding of dialogue with political parties in the whole of 2007. They rather said they didn't want to hold dialogue with parties. These have become counter-productive now. We're now talking about doubt and uncertainty centring the elections, which is the consequence of avoiding dialogue with the political parties in the first year.
The government should have settled these issues in 2007, when it was in a strong and dominating position to eradicate ills of the politics and democracy, and the parties would ask for compromise then. The goal in 2007 was to improve democracy and have a better political culture through free, fair acceptable elections and reforms. Now the goal has changed, and the government is holding dialogue with parties to please them and bring them to general elections at any cost. That's why they are sitting in dialogue with a wanted and accused Jamaat leader.
Where else do you think has the government failed to showwisdom?
Why did it form the Triith Commission so late? Immediately after coming to power, the government could have declared amnesty for all. The Truth Commission came into being after some people were convicted. Isn't it double-standards when you are now saying that you will free some people If they surrender their money?
Evaluate the EC's works?
The EC failed to work by the roadmap. It should have started the main task immediately. Had it formed the RPO, finalised the conduct rules and asked parties for registration, the parties could be compelled to go by those. They are now saying they don't have time to do all these. Now the government is on it's knees, in 2007 the political parties were.
Why did the government fail to realise this at the beginning?
I don't question their intention and I don't think there is any conspiracy. I would rather say the government didn’t have the wisdom needed in that situation.
BNP earlier demanded for going back to the old RPO and Khaleda Zia demanded resignation of all the election commissioners...
The chief election commissioner (CEC) did a mistake by not inviting Khondoker Delwar. He then tried to cover it by calling it a doctrine of necessity, and recently admitted it was a mistake. These are very important for a political party, and the BNP has point to blame the EC. The party split and suffered a setback
But I can in no way support the demand to go back to the previous RPO, considering the'unacceptable legal loopholes like the EC's independence. There should be constructive criticism, but no comments that can aggravate the situation. I think the politicians should not miss the opportunity of election in anyway. Such comments divert attention, and are against the spirit of moving towards democracy.
Why the doubt and uncertainty over election?
The two leading parties' failure to come to a unanimous decision on withdrawal of emergency, upazila election timing and the two leaders' participation in the election freely, and uncertainty over registration caused the uncertainty. Delimitation should have been decided long before.
How can the government ensure the two leaders' release with cases pending against them in the court?
The government can withdraw the cases even after charge framing in the court. Sheikh Hasina was sent abroad on executive order. The government can show its intention by issuing executive orders. However, I think there is question about how essential was their arrest. They could be arrested later.
Now the government is bowing down and sending the advisers to their houses and trying to please them. Does it look good in the eyes of law; does it look good when the government is compelled to sit with a wanted Jamaat leader?
What made the government arrest them?
We saw the government attempting to enforce the Minus-2 formula. They later went for arresting. They should go for arresting them only when they have necessary evidence for investigation. I think the situation that has arisen now wouldn't have arisen had the government avoided arresting them.
Do you see any qualitative changes in political culture?
I would have expected the parties to make some plan for self-purgation before the dialogue. But 1 don't see any change in their mentality. The BNP is demanding the previous RPO, and both the main parties are demanding allowing the convicts to contest in elections. The parties should have said that they wouldn't allow any accused people i n their parties.
Why didn't the change come?
The partied have become emboldened, and they can dictate to the government instead of being dictated by the rules and laws made by die government. They say they want reform, but their actions do not prove it. I think people's expectation has been marred. However, they will get a lesson because the anti-corruption drive has sent a message door to door that nobody is above law.
How much has been done for change in political culture?
which they are,yet to 'accept But experience.shows that the parties have-disregarded the laws over the years, and the EC didn't play its due role. It didn't even play its expected role in the last city and municipality elections. It's true that the parties have brought some changes in their constitutions, but who can ensure that those will be followed? Is our country's constitution followed properly?
Are we going to bid goodbye to confrontational politics soon?
I don't think we will, because going to power is their main goal at any cost. Some big politicians were shaken, but not the cadres. Besides, I am not sure how independently the administration and law enforcing agencies will work during the tenure of an elected government. The CTG has failed to carry out any reforms in the administration — which may lead to its neutral functioning during a political government regime — or ensure professionalism.
How do you see the election environment in the country?
Not up to expectation. The emergency should go first, and the government needs to look at the uncertainties I mentioned earlier. There is a lack of vision and understanding on the government's part about the political and public sensitivity of the issues. Where is the place of the people who supported the government when it took over?
You talked about legislation earlier...
The government has mixed up legislature with the executive. They introduced so many law's and ordinances. By blocking bail, the government is taking judicial power. Lawmaking should have been kept limited only to election, and the government could leave guidelines regarding other issues. The government is not as good as its promises and constitutional pledges.
What about election under emergency?
There will be some sort of panic even if the emergency is relaxed. Besides, how far will the government relax it? It is mentioned in the constitution that some fundamental rights like freedom of speech and expression will remain suspended during emergency'.
Emergency is against human rights. Besides, emergency is not for day-to-day violence; it is for state terrorism. We need a joyful environment for election, and emergency should be withdrawn immediately.
How do you see parties' allegation about imposition of reforms?
Morality can't be enforced by any authority. We can recall the pledges made by the three alliances during the 1990 movement against Ershad, BNP's reforms demand while in opposition and Awami League's 31-point reforms demand. The parties themselves wanted reforms and the CTG just attempted to implement some at the will of the people. But the parties said they wouldn't sign any document when the CTG proposed signing of a national charter.
Do you think parties now need to reach agreement on some national issues?
Yes I do. And there is already agreement among the leaders.
Why don't people see any result then?
It's due to a culture of intolerance. A party doesn't want to accept that what the rival party is saying could be something good. Tolerance also means accepting what's good in others.
How do you see the anti-corruption drive?
The Anti-corruption Commission tried their best. But the process will have to be institutionalised for sustaining the effect. Without depending only on the ACC, every institution will have to use the hierarchy to keep watch on each other to stop corruption. Supervising authorities should also be caught for their inaction in this regard.