& 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

Swagger of an autocrat and the irony of democracy

Syed Munir Khasru
It hurts to see how governments elected through acceptable elections in the last two decades have failed to deliver the promised goods while a dictator brags about his performance on deliverability even during his misrule.*-**
IT was December 6,1990, the Dhaka University campus was in wild jubilation. People from all walks of life thronged into the streets in the joy of victory rarely seen since the country was liberated in 1971. After almost a decade of misrule and resulting suffocation in the national life, the fall of a corrupt dictator reignited the flame of hope and aspirations in the minds of the Bangladeshis again. The dictatorial rule represented very little respect for democratic values as evidenced by the sham elections and the repressive measures unleashed to legitimise the same.
During those moments of euphoria, if anyone could put up a giant futuristic TV screen in either the Shahbag or Farmgate intersection and had shown where the country would be heading in 2012 and what would be the fate of the fallen dictator, people would have been either shocked in disbelief or lynched the host of such a show. The speculation in the air was whether the dictator would flee into exile or be put behind bars or -- under the most lenient circumstances — be allowed to lead a quiet private life far away from national politics and out of sight of the public. Two decades since then, today where are we as a nation and how is the fallen dictator doing?
A man who rigged successive elections today advises the nation on the modalities of holding free and fair elections. The presidential elections of October 1986 showed a voter turnout of more than 50% when in reality it was estimated to be less than onetenth of that. Dozens of deaths resulted in electoral violence as democracy was held hostage to the ambition of an unscrupulous ruler. The May 1986 parliamentary elections had the same story marked by voting fraud, theft of ballot box, beating of opposition activists and polling suspended in 109 constituencies. Official voter turnout was shown as 50% while observers' estimates were not more than half of that. Final results were announced ten days later with JP getting an absolute majority, AL 76 seats, Jamaat 10 seats and BNP boycotting the polls. AL boycotted the first session of parliament and, in July, parliament adjourned indefinitely.
The March 1988 parliamentary elections were even worse as all major parties boycotted the polls. Polling was suspended in at least 170 centres and the regime imposed a news blackout with warning that reporting of violence might lead to closure of the newspaper. 1,500 journalists staged a 9-hour strike. Again an almost voter-less elections were shown to have about 50% turnout. With such a dismal track record of holding elections that were neither fair and hardly participative, in his interview with the Bengali daily Jugantor (September 7,2012), the dictator has the audacity to state that he brought the country back to democratic practices through elections.
Today, thanks to the performance of our politicians, the once disgraced dictator now basks in glory as the two major parties have given him reasons to believe that he represents "a better third choice" as opposed to the only two choices we have had in the history of our parliamentary democracy. The dysfunctional democracy resulting from the confrontational politics
of the two major parties has only emboldened the usurper as today he aspires to be the next prime minister. To quote from his interview with The Daily Star last Friday: "If the JP got more than 60 seats I would become the deciding factor and might become the premier, as neither the AL nor the BNP would be able to reach a consensus on forming a government. This may happen as Hasina and Khaleda cannot stand each other and there is no possibility of a consensus between them." Reading the interview, one can't help but feel depressed as the mutual intolerance of our two leaders and failure of our politicians have reinvigorated the fallen dictator.
From the perspective of governance, the nearly decade-long rule of the autocrat reflected one of the lowest points in the nation's life as corruption was rampant, giving rise to the first generation millionaires, a significant portion of whom gained positions of power and prominence more because of corruption and links to the corrupt regime than for their ingenuity, honesty, and hard work.
Today, after more than two decades of democracy, the common perception is that we have become even more corrupt — morally, intellectually, and financially -- under democracy than what we were under autocracy.
The presidential form of government was replaced by parliamentary democracy to check against arbitrary exercise of state power by one individual for personal gains or advantage. In reality, the marriage of politics and business in the last two decades has seen the emergence of a new breed of politicians who are in politics more for business than in the business of politics. In other words, money has taken over character, muscle has replaced merit, and misuse has overpowered restraint.
For those who are not in politics but are politically conscious citizens, it hurts to see how governments elected through acceptable elections in the last two decades have failed to deliver the promised goods while a dictator brags about his performance on deliverability even during his misrule. It not only makes one disillusioned about politics and politicians but also starts hurting where it matters most -- the inherent faith of people in the positivity of a democratic system whereby each individual can pursue his/her legitimate ambitions and dreams unfettered by the state and supported by their elected representatives.
Recently, the acting secretary general of BNP remarked that those who think of politics in Bangladesh without the two ladies are living in a fool's paradise. May be he is right and may be that is inevitable. However, what also is right is that our two leaders take some time to reflect as to what could have gone wrong in the last two decades that could have empowered a fallen dictator at their expense. Why do popularly elected leaders and governments today seem to have less credibility and acceptability than one of the most unpopular dictators the country was ruled by? Will the two leaders care to pause and think or will their colleagues dare to suggest? We all know the answer.
The writer is a Professor, Institute of Business Administration (IBA), University of Dhaka.