& 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

Further amendment to constitution is an imperative

Further amendment to the constitution is, in my view, imperative for conducting the next parliamentary election in a free, fair, impartial and transparent environment that would be acceptable both at home and abroad.

Md. Ataur Rahman
PRIME Minister Sheikh Hasina said that the next JS election would be held as per parliamentary democratic system prevailing in other countries. One would have thought this was an obvious statement to make, so what is so special about this remark made in London recently?
This is where the catch is. The 15th Amendment to the Constitution made last year incorporated a very strange provision that parliamentary polls will be held within 90 days prior to the expiry of parliament's tenure. As per this provision, the sitting MPs will be able to seek re-election in the next parliamentary election. As such, there would not be a level playing field during the next parliamentary election because the sitting MPs would enjoy the existing facilities while the intending MPs would not get the same facilities.
In democratic countries like the UK, India, New Zealand, Canada, Australia, etc., parliaments are invariably dissolved before elections for making a level playing field. So, the prime minister's remark that the next JS election will be held as per parliamentary democratic system prevailing in other countries is not vindicated.
As per the 15th Amendment, the next parliamentary election will be held within 90 days prior to the expiry of parliament's tenure under Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and the existing cabinet ministers. On the other hand, she said while talking to BBC recently in London that the upcoming parliamentary election may be held under an interim government, where opposition MPs may also be inducted if they wanted. But the present constitution does not permit that. Her remark indirectly indicates that she will lead the interim government. But the leader of the opposition Begum Khaleda Zia rejected the proposal outright and again firmly declared that the next parliamentary election must be held under a non-partisan government.
Begum Zia rejected the proposal because the present constitution entrusted all executive powers to the prime minister and because, during the tenure of the present government, the administration, law enforcing agencies and the courts have been politicised very blatantly as viewed by the opposition political parties.
launches and trains by the administration and law enforcing agencies at the instruction of the government. An unofficial hartal was observed throughout the country. Live telecasting of the speech of the leader of the opposition by 3 private TV channels was also suddenly stopped. The government did the same thing to foil the grand rally held in Dhaka by BNP-led opposition parties on June 11.
Moreover, some government officers/officials attended the political
We have seen how the present government raised barricades by using the administration, law enforcing agencies and Awami League cadres to foil the grand rally held in Dhaka by BNP-led opposition parties on March 12. Dhaka was totally isolated from other parts of the country for 3 days through stopping of buses, steamers,
rallies, human chains and grand rallies of the ruling party with banners on March 7, 11 and 14, respectively, which were telecast live by the TV channels. As such, it has been clearly proved by the above instances that a fair, neutral, transparent and acceptable parliament election is not possible under this government with the
politicised administration and law enforcing agencies.
Moreover, the majority of the people also want the next parliament election to be held under a non-«partisan, neutral interim government. In this context, it may be mentioned here that out of 13 Amici Curiae invited by the Supreme Court to give their opinions, 12 advocated in favour of a non-partisan, neutral caretaker government. Of course, they opined that the judiciary should not be involved in the process. Many eminent citizens of the country also opined in favour of a non-partisan, neutral caretaker government while discussing with the Committee for Reforms and Amendment of the Constitution. As per survey reports conducted by some newspapers, more than 90% people of the country are in favour of a caretaker government.
In view of the facts stated above, a non-partisan, neutral interim government is needed for conducting the next parliament election in a free, fair, impartial and transparent environment that would be acceptable both at home and abroad. I would like to suggest the following formula for formation of the government: BNP will propose 5 names of non-partisan, neutral persons acceptable to Awami League, while Awami League will propose 5 names of non-partisan, neutral persons acceptable to BNP, who will act as advisers of the interim government, and these 10 persons will propose the name of 1 nonpartisan, neutral person acceptable to both BNP and Awami League, who will act as chief adviser of the interim government.
Given the present context, further amendment to the constitution is, in my view, imperative for conducting the next parliamentary election in a free, fair, impartial and transparent environment that would be acceptable both at home and abroad.
The writer is an occasional contributor.