|
Reflections on power and authority
Salauddin Qader Chowdhury
The twentieth century has been a century of heroes. We have had communist heroes like Lenin and Stalin, fascist heroes like Mussolini, Hitler and Franco, democratic heroes like the two Roosevelts, Wilson, Churchill and Kennedy. In the sub-continent we had our own share of luminaries like the Ali brothers of Bombay, the Nehrus of Kashmir, the Bose brothers of Calcutta, Mohammad Ali Jinnah of Pakistan and Shaikh Mujibur Rahman of Bangladesh. All of them have left their indelible marks in the annals of our recent history.
With the possible exception of the Ali brothers and Pandit Motilal Nehru, the memories of the other personalities throb and thrive in political controversy till day. Indeed, this is the essence of pluralist societies that not only tolerate but also inspire free thoughts. No leaders in the contemporary history of the sub-continent laid claim to Thomas Carlyle’s Divine Heroism.
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Jinnah are criticised till today for the break-up of British India into India and Pakistan. Independent India has still not decided how to deal with the memory of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose due to his siding with the Axis Powers in the 2nd World War - despite his undisputed credential as a Freedom Fighter. In Bangladesh today, the party in power claims that it is sacrilege to think, speak or write anything remotely critical of Mujib. One cannot but wonder whether this enforced deification helps enrich the memory of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman or whether it brings into focus the memories, which the Awami League prefers to forget.
There can be no doubt that Sheikh Mujib was a politician. We revere him as a successful politician - someone who could articulate the grievances of the common people and bear the burden of political persecutions. His contributions cannot be understated. Giving him all his dues, it is not possible to deify him to the point of claiming him to be infallible. These attempts to claim sainthood for Mujib can only invite comments highlighting the less charitable aspects of his life or character. Politicians thrive on controversy. When Mujib introduced the 6 Points programme, he was the most controversial politician in Pakistan. Yet it was this controversy that catapulted Mujib to the position of a national leader. His successes made him a national hero, his failures made him a martyr.
Emerson says: “Nature will be reported. All things are engaged in writing their history. The planet, the pebble, goes attended by its shadow. The rolling rock leaves its scratches on the mountain; the river its channel on the soil; the animal its bones in the stratum; the fern and leaf their modest epitaph on the coal.”
Written history is always subjective. The passage of centuries decreases the subjectivity of recorded history and increases objectivity. The history of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides, a classic, is not considered to be strictly objective as passions on the subject considered are still too raw to allow any independent evaluation. Despite the extraordinary facility of the English language demonstrated by Edward Gibbon, his “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” written centuries after the events he describes, is still not considered as being innocent of subjectivity. Thus attempts to suggest that Bangladesh was the first creation in the cosmos, that the history of this universe commenced in 1971 and that the last messiah was a Bengali from Gopalganj, invites less amusement and more scorn and ridicule. All of us are inclined to relive the past in accordance to our own likes and dislikes, but history does not permit it.
It is a common feature of new democracies that almost at regular intervals, constitutional governments are interrupted by illegitimate means. At times, the shortcomings and failings of political governments create conditions, in which the populace welcomes a respite from politicians and becomes gullible to the rationale of any new usurper of state power. A few ambitious officers, who arrogate to themselves the right to represent the might of the armed forces, traditionally use three arguments to rationalise any military takeover - deteriorating law and order situation, alleged corruption of politicians and finally the law of necessity or the lack of any other viable options.
For the past two years, General Moin and his collaborators had tried to argue that the suspension of the Constitution on 11th January 2007 - starting with the blatant violation of the Article 58C and the usurpation of state authority by unconstitutional means - was inevitable, due to the prevalent political conditions. The former Army Chief informs us that the army intervention was prompted by threats from foreign ambassadors to suspend Bangladesh army’s participation in the UN Peacekeeping Missions. This argument tends to suggest that the continuity of constitutional government in Bangladesh is dependent on the pecuniary satisfaction of the armed forces. General Moin’s rationalisation is perhaps unkind to the rank and file of the military, which possibly does not take pride in being portrayed as a mercenary force. The hapless General’s arguments only reaffirm Edmund Burke’s words -“Dissent, not satisfied with toleration, is not conscience, but ambition.”
The military intervention on January 11, 2007, has been described by the Awami League in a variety of ways on different calendar days. It has been welcomed by the AL on 1/11 as being a product of its own political movement. Subsequently, when it attracted the ire of the military government, the AL described this as an illegitimate military takeover. Throughout the two years of the self-proclaimed “Caretaker Government”, everybody in Bangladesh knew that it was the government of Gen. Moin U. Ahmed. The civil administration knew it, the business community knew it, the politicians knew it, the men on the streets knew it and the farmers in the paddy fields knew it; the only individuals, who acted, as if, they did not know it, were the instigators - the infamous “Quartet” of the Tuesday Club of Western diplomats. The shenanigans of this “Quartet” has been documented by the redoubtable Gen. Moin in his publications, who claims that he did not declare Martial Law despite encouragements from international sponsors.
The reign of the Rwandan bandits in Bangladesh (2007-8) will probably be remembered for the remarkable ease, with which the Bangladeshi elite was coerced into submission without a whimper, firstly by brute force and threats to life and liberty of near and dear ones and, secondly, by material enticements. Judges of the Supreme Court, senior lawyers, professors of universities, members of the civil administration, professionals, champions of the media, captains of industry, leaders of NGOs, members of the celebrated civil society and politicians were all victims of blackmail by a military intelligence organisation. Some were beaten black and blue in the torture chambers in the Dhaka Cantonment, some were manhandled in the RAB Headquarters or the 13-storied DGFI Headquarters, some were invited to dinner or tea and shown evidences of misdemeanors or wrongdoings, some were cowed down by threats to life and liberty of their near and dear ones. These machinations of our “boys in olive green” brought forth some new heroes in the national media, who frothed at the mouth in promoting the agenda of the not-so-tall General. These post-facto collaborators engaged in voicing such weird arguments in favour of the military government that at times it embarrassed the marauding military - the dismissal of Barrister Moinul Hossein was a case in point. Retired civil servants hobbled for new jobs, irrelevant politicians vied for new positions in an expected “King’s Party”, new operatives promoting new rent-seeking activities rushed around the watering holes of the new power elite, academics queued up for foreign postings or even local positions, some journalists competed with one another in promoting the junta’s view, the much touted “civil society” was in a state of ecstasy.
All these heroes of expediency found novel arguments for postponing elections and in favour of violating the mandatory provision of Article 123 (3) of the Constitution, which stipulates that elections must be held within 90 days of dissolution of Parliament. Constitutional experts competed with one another with perverted interpretations to endorse the violation of the Constitution in prolonging Emergency rule and delaying General Elections.
Amongst the heroes appointed by General Moin’s junta to do their bidding, the most remarkable were the not-so-venerable three Election Commissioners. This trio started their activities like Lewis Carrol’s “I shall be judge, I shall be jury, said cunning Old Fury” in Alice in Wonderland. Having taken an oath to protect the Constitution, their first act was to violate it by failing to hold elections in 90 days. Having done that, they engaged in reforming political parties by diktat. They promoted disintegration of political parties by arbitrarily recognising leadership of parties according to the whims of the junta that appointed them. Obviously, no one could ask these three factotums of General Moin as to where they got the mandate for ostensible “reforms” of political parties or to change the leadership of political parties. Hundreds of crores were spent in preparation of the electoral rolls and issuing national identity cards, which were touted to be the prerequisite of General Elections. Indeed, the issue of identity cards was used as the prime argument for postponing the elections for two years.
When elections were finally held, the identity cards were not used and to their credit the General’s infamous Election Commission produced multiple Electoral Rolls for the General Elections. The Electoral Roll given to the candidates in the election was totally a different Electoral Roll supplied to the election conducting personnel at each polling station - the serial numbers of the two Electoral Rolls did not match. The Quartet of the Tuesday Club and the election observers gave a “Certificate of Brilliance” to the elections of December, 2008 that created a history in the sub-continent by recording a phenomenal 87 per cent votes. One cannot but remember that international observers were unanimous in their endorsement of the elections of Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan and Nourri of Iraq. The heroes of the 2008 election, Mr. ATM Shamsul Huda, Mr. Sahul Hossain and Brig. Sakhawat, shall be remembered in our political history for their dexterity as election engineers in subverting and perverting demonstration of popular will. Never in the history of elections has “so much (87% votes cast) been owed by so many (264 seats out of 300) to so few (3 EC Commissioners)
The election of December 2008 was a grand success. It humbled two major political parties - the BNP and the Awami League. While one was humiliated to a level of 30 seats, the other was embarrassed by an overwhelming 264 seats in a Parliament of 300 seats. For a full 48 hours, the entire country including the Prime Minister was in a state of shock. In the words of Oscar Wilde, “The play was a grand success, but the audience was a disaster.”
Charity or endowment of the power to govern does not contribute to the authority of the government. A civilian government that is indebted for its office to power centres other than the electorate, cannot function with any degree of confidence. The government’s inability to respond promptly to the BDR rebellion on 25th February, 2009, demonstrated its sense of insecurity and reliance for power on sources other than popular will. It is possibly the same sense of diffidence that has obliged the government to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court in deciding which courts should try the rebels.
There are marked inconsistencies in government policy relating to dealing with errant members of the uniformed forces. At one point it has chosen to negotiate and declare amnesty to the BDR rebels. No less than the Prime Minister herself was subjected to the gripes and accusations of Army officers. Now, the nation is given to understand that 33 BDR personnel have died in custody while about 1900 await trial, the army officers, who were outspoken at the meeting with the Prime Minister have been dismissed and a political purge is in progress. Whether these contradictory policies erode or inspire credibility of the government remains to be seen.
Insecurity is a plague that continues to haunt the political government. It is obliged to seek shelter from its past tormentors – for, they are also its benefactors. The Awami League has certainly been placed in power - it is now in search of authority. There is a discernible distinction between power to govern and the authority to govern. Without a government that has legitimate authority to govern, the pursuit of good governance would be like a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that is not even there.
There are many lessons to be learnt from the military takeover of 11th January, 2007. One of them is that, despite all the eloquence of the West in promoting democracy in the developing world, all this rhetoric is subject to the perceived “national interests” of the concerned members of the developed world. It must have been in the “interests” of the West that the 150 million people of Bangladesh were disenfranchised for a period of two years. There can be no other rationale for the support provided to the military leaders, who usurped state power with such impunity.
The sentinels of our independence and sovereignty need to be protected from themselves. A very credible impression that a section of the armed forces amassed enormous fortunes in the course of the last two years of military rule, is damaging to the image of the military. A particular section of the military leadership, in its own interest, projects the army as a mercenary force for hire. Unless and until this image is cleansed, the armed forces of Bangladesh would not be accepted with any degree of credibility nationally or internationally.
During the last two years many luminaries of our political arena compromised. The instinct for political survival and the lust for political power by major and minor personalities were all on public display. Vocal champions of populist democracy succumbed to the luring machinations of the power elite and are now captives to this debt. While this power elite could arrange Awami League’s coming to power, the authority to govern remains an elusive ghost. Not all the verbal gymnastics in the world would be able to restore the chastity that was lost in the elections that recorded an eighty seven percent turnout. “Not all the king’s horses, nor all the king’s men can put Humpty Dumpty together again.”
Any Sergeant Jerry Rawlins can take over power of government. But to be able to exercise authority effectively, even Pretenders to the Throne are obliged to seek popular approbation. The Awami League government is no exception. The continuity of representative and accountable governance demands that the Constitution is protected and upheld. Failure to defend the Constitution is bound to promote insecurity and keep constitutional government constantly vulnerable. If violations of the Constitution are ignored, tolerated or condoned, the platitudes of right to life, liberty, democracy and human rights would remain mere clichés. The authority of a constitutional government is effective and, indeed, enhanced when the government is supported and accountable to popular will, reflected by a rule of law guaranteed by the Constitution that is protected, defended and upheld. The exercise of authority under the Constitution by the electorate must be the only mode of determining the victors and the vanquished of our political arena.
Our fragile democracy needs adequate protection in the form of effective deterrents against political adventurism of a few individuals, whose ambitions have proved to be greater than their competence. Responsible politics in a functional framework of the Constitution enhances executive authority and allows the electorate to choose their own champions, distinguish between vice and virtue, elect heroes and discard villains.
The author is a senior BNP leader and MP
 ^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^
|
