& 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

Obdurate bureaucracy imperils democracy

Although the politicians cannot absolve themselves of their faults, bureaucrats, by dint of their knowledge of rules of business and gift of gab, often suggest that their political colleagues in the government commit themselves to activities that appear rosy for the country and for themselves. And, most often, the politicians fall prey to this sinister design.

Z.A. Khan
RECENTLY. The Daily Star conducted an opinion poll to ascertain peoples' response to the government's mulling over clipping the wings of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) by curbing its authority to investigate allegations against three categories of "special citizens." The response, as expected, was negative.
The authorising of a mandatory role to lawmakers in the upazila administration was not acceptable to most people. The saga of sacking and quick re-instating of three judges drew flak from the Bar. the Bench and the people at large. Our memory is not short enough to forget the Janatar Mancha episode, which was organised by the bureaucracy.
Although 10 months are not enough to implement the pledges, these instances cast shadows of despair and frustration. Why is this happening despite the huge support that the Awami League got in the last election? Is it because of the lawmakers inclination to make hay while the sun shines by adopting free style wheeling dealing ways? Or could it be because the government is not informed about the sliding politico-economic and law and order situation by the concerned organs of the government? Who is in charge of the organs of the government? The people voted AL to power on the assurance that it will bring about changes for the better, but the signs of that are yet to surface. They think that the government has been made to reverse its election pledges so that lawmakers and the party rank and file can eat the cake and have it too. The political leadership of AL cannot be blamed for the prevailing state of affairs.
It is said that the bureaucracy is an essential adjunct for good governance, which propels democracy and fuels development. Can we apportion a part of the blame on the bureaucracy lor creating impediments is the way of implementation of the pledges?
One can sense bonhomie between the lawmakers and the bureaucracy for reasons not too difficult to find. This mutual back-scratching stems from politicians' (in the government) dependence on the bureaucracy to support their development schemes, which is their passport to re-election.
In today's environment, nobody believes in free lunch and, therefore, the bureaucracy extracts heavy toll from the politicians, who respond obligingly. This makes them power-pushers and at the same time helps them pocket pay-offs.
There are umpteen examples where bureaucracy misguided the political government when it (bureaucracy) was not kept in good humour. Although the politicians cannot absolve themselves of their faults, bureaucrats, by dint of their knowledge of rules of business and gift of gab. often suggest that their political colleagues in the government commit themselves to activities that appear rosy for the country and for themselves. And, most often, the politicians fall prey to this sinister design.
Bureaucrats are generally intelligent and well conversant with the rules of business, while their political colleagues in the government may not be so. Therefore, their dependence on the bureaucracy for administrative support to implement their agenda is enormous. It is not difficult for the relatively eloquent bureaucrats to feel their political colleagues’ nervousness with regard to handling initiatives that focus on their constituency's demands but are not permissible within rules.
The bureaucrats in these instances advise lawmakers as to how to fulfill their desire for development of their area and at the same time to make personal gains. If ever any digression from the rules is detected, the elusive bureaucrats escape without eliciting public wrath while the politicians are obliged to face the repercussions.
Bangladesh is ruled by an elitist oligarchy. Our politics and governance have become the domain of a narrow elite. While wealth is considered as an essential ingredient for participation in politics, flattery is considered as a stock in trade for flourishment of bureaucracy. If this corporate arrangement is allowed to take root then good governance will become a far cry.
Experience reveals that if the former tries to assert, the latter plays truant with the tasks assigned so that delay occurs in the execution, which culminates in conflict between them. This calls for administration of a healing touch.
Does this situation call for construction of a bridge of friendship between the two sides or resurrection of Good Samaritan values to give fillip to the obligations to perform? To my understand ing, creation and protection of the organs of the good governance should be accorded priority.
Most of the rules of business, which are considered as gospels of good governance, were framed during the British Raj to exploit the subjects. So, the ramifications of these rules on our prevailing socio-economic conditions and political aspirations should be considered immediately.
Differences on political issues are transitory, they can be resolved with time. Our concern should be to see them in perspective against the background of affinity that we as a nation should take pride in. Those in power by the grace of electorate are temporarily in charge of affairs but have no right to shirk the responsibility of keeping the nation together on the issues that may disturb the administration, especially when the servants of the republic treat them from partisan points of view for personal benefit. This is the legacy of good governance which history will retain to open again when irritants are removed.
One may consider providing training to the lawmakers about rules of business at the behest of the Jatiya Shangshad so that the bureaucracy's cutting edge in this regard is blunted. It must be ensured that whims of the politicians do not inhibit the careers of the bureaucrats. There must be close understanding and cohesion between these two vital stakeholders responsible for good governance. Political parties should caution their rank and file not to express any hasty judgment on the performance of the party in power. The government should never impose any stifling condition on the opposition that may jeopardise the possibility of cooperation.
These are situations that the bureaucracy takes advantage of. So, political parties should inculcate the habit ol taking initiatives that focus on encouraging engagement in dialogue to remove apprehension about government moves.
Faulty or partisan interpretation of government orders or rules by the bureaucracy may create a crack, which may eventually snowball into crumbling of the institutional structure. So the bureaucracy should be motivated through fair governance not to indulge in activities that may not augur well for its sustenance.
The government and the opposition should endure with good grace any constructive criticism, and act upon it to foster confidence and cooperation. This will deter the bureaucracy from impeding the process of democracy and development. Let the servants of the republic discharge their responsibilities without partisan bias and let the politicians convey their ignorance and dependence on them because the tax payers expect them to do so.
A mechanism should be evolved to monitor violations of the rules of business. Let us resolve to rebuild the organs of our government by reforming and revamping the old rules that provide loopholes for flattery and violations for personal gains, which have prompted the bureaucracy to take advantage to meet their personal ends.
ZA Khan is a former Director General of Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies