(This was published in the Financial Express and the New Nation on 10 April 2011).
It is indeed very interesting and sensational news and message for the nation that the BNP on 7 April 2012 withdrew the felicitation it had extended to the government after Bangladesh won the maritime boundary case against Myanmar at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea last month. This was disclosed by Mirza Fakrul Islam, Acting secretary general of BNP, during his speech on the other day as the chief guest at a roundtable styled “Achievement and non-achievement through the verdict over maritime boundary with Myanmar” organized by Bangla daily Amar Desh at the Institution of Engineers Bangladesh seminar room in Dhaka. He said ‘the verdict of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) had mathematical deceits, which we were not aware of before. We were confused by the massive [government] publicity of conquering the Bay of Bengal' and we extended our thanks without knowing details about the verdict. But after identifying the loopholes, we stand corrected.”
Claiming that Bangladesh failed to gain anything in the legal battle, Fakhrul alleged that the government did not make proper preparations to fight at the court and also pointed out distinctively that the prime minister was using the maritime boundary verdict as a campaigning tool because she said Awami League would secure such “victory” with India in 2014, if voted to power again. The maritime boundary dispute with India is scheduled to be solved by an international arbitration court in 2014.
While presenting a paper, master mariner Capt M Rezaul Karim Chowdhury claimed that Myanmar has gained victory through the verdict, not Bangladesh. However, law professor of Dhaka University Asif Nazrul strongly protested the claim saying, "Both the countries have a win-win situation." (Daily Star, April 8, 2012)
The ITLOS on March 14 delivered the verdict which upheld Bangladesh's claim of 200-nautical miles of exclusive economic and territorial rights in the Bay of Bengal rejecting the claims of Myanmar. The International Tribunal of the Sea decided on the basis of International Law; it did not favor any country. Previously, the maritime limit was three miles, then 22 miles and now it is 200 miles for all the countries. There is nothing new in this case except the formal judicial recognition if the right of Bangladesh, which was earlier denied unilaterally by Myanmar from its perspective. It is a historic verdict, first of its kinds in the life of ITOLS since its birth, made on the basis of realities, necessities and legitimacy of the claims submitted by Bangladesh and Myanmar to the International Tribunal at Hamburg and it shall no doubt be duly treated as a ‘persuasive precedent’ in future.
Why did such mistakes take place in case of the Major opposition in the Parliament, which were in power three times (if elections of February 15, 1996 is duly included), and has been in the seat of the Opposition for the second term since the reintroduction of parliamentary democracy in Bangladesh? Outright answer is that our Opposition hardly pays attention to prepare and deliver any speech, oral or written, document etc based on research, data, facts and figures in a proper and scientific mode and method involving experts, think-tanks and so on from the respective fields and areas. To do this perfectly, there is no alternative to the formation of a Shadow Cabinet and then gearing it up in the fullest volume and extent.
This is on record that all the political parties which have currently had seats in parliament were in power by rotation in the immediate past and AL and BNP have been in Parliament as the majority party and major opposition by rotation since the reintroduction of multiparty parliamentary democracy in 1991 through the Constitution(Twelfth Amendment) Act of 1991. To our utter surprise, neither AL nor BNP while in the Opposition ever gave thought to form a Shadow Cabinet/Council of Ministers in the past nor BNP currently being the major opposition in the 9th Parliament thinks so at all. In fact, Shadow Cabinet is one of the best essential components of a Parliamentary democracy by which Opposition in Parliament play their role more logically, systematically and responsibly vis-à-vis the Cabinet of the party-in-power. It originated in UK at a certain stage of the development of parliamentary democracy there and then it was passed to other Commonwealth countries where it was tailored and adjusted to the respective political landscapes depending on time, space and dimension.
In a nutshell, ‘the Shadow Cabinet is a senior group of opposition spokespersons in the Westminster system of government who together under the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition form an alternative cabinet to the government's, whose members shadow or mark each individual member of the government. Members of a shadow cabinet are often but not always appointed to a Cabinet post if and when their party gets into government. It is the Shadow Cabinet's responsibility to pass criticism on the current government and its respective legislation, as well as offering alternative policies.
In France it is called Contre-gouvernement (counter-government), dubbed by the media "cabinet fantôme" (literally: ghost cabinet). It is known as Shadow government in Israel and Ukraine and Opposition Front Bench (Fianna Fáil) In the Republic of Ireland and in Canada, however, the term ‘Opposition Critics’ is more customary. In nearly all countries, a member of the shadow cabinet is referred to as a Shadow Minister and the Leader of Opposition is often seen as the Prime Minister-in-waiting.
Methods of nomination to the office also vary. Some parliamentary parties, outstandingly the Australian Labor Party, elect all the members of their shadow cabinets in a party room ballot, with the Leader of the Opposition then allocating portfolios to the Shadow Ministers. In other parliamentary parties, the membership and composition of the Shadow Cabinet is generally determined solely by the Leader of the Opposition.
In some jurisdictions, third parties (which are neither participant in the government or in the official opposition) may also form their own parliamentary front benches of critics; however, parliamentary standing orders on the right for parties to speak often dictate that the right to speak can only be granted to a party or group if a minimum number of members can be recorded by the party. In Ireland, for example, technical groups are often formed by third parties and independent TDs in the Dáil Éireann in order to increase the members' right to speak against larger parties which can afford the right to speak as Front Benches in Government or Opposition.
By neglecting this aspect of parliamentary democracy in Bangladesh perspective, both Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia virtually are liable for squeezing the scopes and shutting the doors to the growth of responsible opposition in our context. Formation of Shadow Government/Cabinet is no doubt a call of time so that Opposition may speak more authentically and responsibly based on research entailing data, facts and figures. Irresponsible or baseless statements from the Opposition are not expected of and everybody should not talk on every issue or topic. This is an era of science and technology and world is moving very fast in line with this. Specialization has been outshining generalization. Political leaders of Bangladesh have no choice but to accept this truth and reality. Leader of the Opposition, Chief Whip, Whips and General Secretary of the Opposition political party must have to embrace and move with this reality, willingly or unwillingly. Otherwise they will definitely lag behind inviting a risk of being marginalized politically in course of time. New generations are being brought up under these very environments.
Today the maxims should be ‘Talk less, work more’, ‘Understand first what you utter and say then deliver’, ‘Knowledge and information are real power, muscles go latter’. To move with time, Let there be Shadow Government without any delay in Bangladesh. Here a sense of competition will develop among the rising leaders and the nation shall be in a better position to find more and more statesmen who will really be unique in the art of statecrafts for which Bangladesh is suffering and which the nation has been longing for long. It will uphold the real honor, dignity and flavor of the second party/alliance in Parliament. Above all, the prevailing undesirable negative notion of the Administration including officials and diplomats in the foreign ministry, law-enforcing agencies and the armed forces about the Opposition in Parliament shall be transformed into a positive perception consequently.
Our fledgling multi-party parliamentary democracy will, in the process, get a better scope to flourish. Our political parties and their leaders will then be better placed to help put Bangladesh on a firm standing at home and abroad. May Allah bless us, bless Bangladesh and bless, bless our two petticoat political parties and ranks and files to suit the very purposes accordingly indeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment