Non-Party, Neutral CTG or All-Party Poll-time Government?

[This was published in Dhaka Courier on25 October 2013]

Pragmatically enough, in my pieces titled ‘Emergence of another 1/11’ published in Dhaka Courier on 31 January 2012 and on 28 March 2013 in the Financial Express under the heading ‘Dealing with election complexities’  I wrote:

‘Looking at the ongoing volatile political landscape in the country many line of thoughts are actively taking of another 1/11 type of army-backed government as the last resort to save the country from immediate overall havoc.(a) Is the appearance of another 1/11 now free from constitutional bottlenecks? (b) Is there any guarantee in full that free and fair elections are possible under such government in the end? (c) How can a possible route be devised to suit the very purposes of holding free and fair election to the 10^th Parliament? Keeping all these queries in mind let us see and visit the realities centering the model of government to the next elections to the 10^th parliament.

Next election to the 10^th parliament may take place under any of the following five models of government:

a. Under the ruling party led by Sheikh Hasina keeping parliament alive; or

b. Under the immediate past regime led by Sheikh Hasina; or

c. Under a Non-party, neutral Care-Taker Government through mutual understanding of the ruling and the oppositions largely between AL and BNP; or

d. Under an All-Party/National Government consisting of members of various political parties, inside or outside the Parliament or the both, through mutual understanding of the ruling and the oppositions largely under the folds of AL-led grand alliance and BNP-led 18-party coalition; or

e. Under a model of another army-backed 1/11 type of Care-Taker Government without prying of political parties’.

Receptively enough, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s  proposal on 18 October 2013 delivered by her over Radios and Televisions containing a vague format of  an ‘all-party election-time government’ with a passionate request to the Leader of the Opposition in the current 9^th Parliament Begum Khaleda Zia to pass names for possible induction into such government is, strictly speaking, a kind of political development in the sense that it is on all counts ‘one step forward’ budging from her earlier rigid stand to give no concession against the relevant provision(s) of the constitution that came into effect through the Constitution(Fifteenth Amendment) 2011. More inspiring is that Hasina has started walking along one of the stripe of the aforementioned options (d). Jatio party led by HM Ershad has meanwhile aired its voice by noting that the very proposal is unambiguous and incomplete. Jamaat-e-Islami rejected it outright adding that it was another drive by the ruling alliance to throw a monkey wrench in the works the nine percent people aimed at the establishment of non-party, neutral CTG during the period of elections to the 10^th Parliament. Think-tanks of various folds, forms and dimensions have more or less viewed the proposal as a positive one asking the ruling party to explain with necessary highlighting and elaborations. In its guarded reactions and responses, BNP on 19 October called it a kind of confusion and tricks to divert the expressed opinion of the masses and overhauled its earlier position for ‘Non-Party, Neutral CTG’ renewing its pledge to ‘resist and foil any elections sans such CTG to the 10^th Parliament’.

Now the questions are (a) Are BNP and its alliance, if truth be told, talking and fighting for a Non-Party, Neutral CTG in the real application and implication of the concept? Or (b) is it a sort of politico-strategic fixture, which is not distinct, clear and hardheaded in its entirety paving way more for further march of utopia? Are AL and its allies sincere and committed as much as necessary to ensure free and fair atmosphere to hold elections conducted independently by the EC under such all-party poll-time government at the same time keeping the existing articles, clauses and sub-clauses in the Constitution dealing with the powers and functions of Prime Minister living in full as all powers under the ongoing provisions nigh on Prime Minister making the Council of Ministers a mere marionette for which it is dubbed also a kind of ‘Prime Ministerial Dictatorship’. Here everything comes from and rotates around the PM. From these standpoints, it is better to conclude that neither Non-Party, Neutral CTG nor All-party poll-time administration under the present constitutional provisions dealing with the powers and functions of the Prime Ministers in relation to those of the Council of Ministers and the President seems to be viable and operative to help grow parliamentary democracy here in Bangladesh. Explanation and elaboration may be dogged as follows:

Interestingly enough, Bangladesh in the past has never experienced any non-party, neutral care-taker government from the point of view of the practical application of the provision, constitutional or consensus, dealing with the appointment to the office of its members of the Council of Advisers. What it met with from 1990 to 2006 to 2007 was either party-backed or army-backed so-called Non-Party, Neutral Care-Taker Government. In fact, the concept of non-party, neutral CTG was first coined and floated publicly by Jamaat-e-Islami in 1994 and then it was formally placed by AL. In 1995 the then Acting Chairman of Jatio Party Mizanur Rahman Chowdhury also put forward his frame of CTG. Commonwealth envoy Sir Ninian’s formula was the magnetic utter of the day while US congressman Stephen Solarz’s move should be taken as a driving force as well.  And finally taking note of all the suggestions, proposals and frames BNP, then in power, absorbed the concept practically putting it into operation through the passage of the Constitution (Thirteenth Amendment) Act of 1996.

It is true that neither any party in the opposition nor a think tank/civil society opposed the very contents of this CTG, which was or less a reflection of the non-party, neutral CTG of 1990. From the standpoint of definite sort of definition, parameter and limitations, it was, perhaps, first of its kind in the taxonomy of politics and political science. But the resultant feedbacks and insinuations with which this non-party, neutral CTG faced again and again paved the way from broader to the broadest for political discontent in a geometric alacrity because of operational appliance and thrusts.

It is on record that in all the four elections from 1991 to 2008 the very spirit of non-party, neutral care-taker government was neglected and set aside on the point of President’s choosing ten members of the Council of Advisers in his own estimation of ‘non-party, neutral standing’ of such persons. Rather those names were chosen and selected by the two major political parties AL and BNP on parity basis i.e. five from each party.  Let us see how fantastically all these occurred in

CTG, apart from its routine powers and functions, was made non-party, neutral putting it on two fundamental pillars namely (a) provisions for appointment to the office of Chief Adviser (Head of CTG) under articles 58C(3),(4), (5) and (6) and (b) provisions for appointment as member of the Council of Advisers of CTG under article 58C(7).

In the first time, in pursuance of the historic seven points formula of 1990, ‘sitting Chief Justice of Bangladesh’ (then Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed) was chosen as Chief Adviser and ten members of the Council of Advisers were appointed by the Acting President Shahabuddin Ahmed on parity basis upon recommendations by the two major political alliance under the leaderships of AL president Sheikh Hasina and BNP chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia. Subsequently, in the thirteenth amendment person in sequence for the office of CA was determined and fixed by the clauses 58C (3), (4), (5) and (6) and persons to be appointed as advisers was left to the President under article 58C(7). Important is here the clause 58C (7) that read:

‘‘The President shall appoint Advisers from among the persons who are

(a)   qualified for election as members of Parliament;

(b)   (b) not members of any political party or of any organization associated with or affiliated to any political party;

(c)   (c) not, and have agreed in writing not be, candidates for the ensuing election of members of Parliament;

(d)   (d) not over seventy-two years of age.

But in practice the choice of the persons who were appointed as advisers went too conclusively to the major political parties on parity basis i.e. five from AL’s recommendation and five from BNP’s list.  All these pointedly unfurled the truth that it was a kind of ‘party-backed non-party, neutral CTG’. Therefore, the very foundation of the non-party, neutral CTG was challenged and spoiled by the political parties themselves at the start of it. Hence, it should rather be called ‘party-backed non-party, neutral CTG’.

The question of neutrality of the person as CA was maligned nakedly first in 2004 when the age limit of the CJ was raised from 65 to 67 by the ruling BNP targeting Justice KM Hasan, allegedly said to be a pro-BNP person, as the next CJ so that he might be the immediate last past CJ to lead the next  third non-party, neutral care-taker government and secondly by preferring ‘supersession’ by the incumbent ruling AL in 2010 with a view to appointing ‘political choice’  as CJ and thus the office of the CJ fell victim of politics for suiting the very purpose of the party in power on different period of time. As an inevitable consequence, the very ‘constitutional choice’ under article 58C (3) and (4) got transformed into ‘politico-constitutional choice’, Later centering this ‘politico- constitutional choice’ in place of ’non-partisan constitutional choice’ crisis cropped up and developed to such an extent that finally put an end to the constitutional longevity of the so-called non-party, neutral CTG through the Fifteenth amendment on 2011 following a verdict of the SC of Bangladesh that declared the system as unconstitutional and illegal.. Not only this that it was due to the failure of the major political parties AL and BNP to follow the constitutional route or to find out a mutually reasonable acceptable path to overcome the impasse that virtually brought the country to a halt that the very army-backed non-party, neutral CTG was born in Bangladesh in 2007, which going beyond the constitutional limit of 90 days lasted about two years.

Now, oppositions demand for the revival of the Non-Party, neutral CTG is again revolving alongside the same line of ‘politico-constitutional choice’ for the appointment of members of the Council of Advisers and Chief Adviser (since this office shall never be held by a retired chief justice or retired justice of the Appellate Division of Supreme Court anymore following the verdict of SC). Whether there shall be any non-party, neutral CTG in future in line with the verdict of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (another two terms covering 10^th and 11^th Parliaments) that is not the issue here to be discussed. What is important here is that reality unfolds the truth all over again that here political parties are, in fact, cautiously after a party-backed non-party, neutral CTG under the cover of highly talked-about no-party, neutral CTG. What, what a bewildering music of historic double standard it is!!!

Yes, now it appears that Premier Sheikh Hasina is unwavering to come out of these complexities and she has, accordingly, called for an all-party poll-time government headed by her. ‘Headed by her (as the head of the ongoing government)’ is now the core of the whole issue, which is allergic for Begum Khaleda Zia as well, and the proposal is still far away from being a concrete one.  Sheikh Hasina must have to make it clear, understandable and outfitted if she in actuality wants to make it a success. It is also important that so many hazy and cloudy interpretations being made by a number of overenthusiastic ministers and party office-bearers have to be stopped with a view to receiving positive gestures and responses from the major opposition BNP.

Keeping an eye on all these in factual politico-constitutional perspectives, there is no denying the fact that Hasina’s proposal is more pragmatic, political and constitutional in all respects provided the overall veiled tactics and viciousness by the ruling party to foil the victory of the opposition, if any, are not played even impalpably or if ever played as such then measures should be ensured in the most transparent mode and manner by the Election Commission that, first of all, needs to be independent not in words but in actions. Further attention must be paid to the restricting of the powers and functions of Prime Minister, Council of Ministers both collectively and individually and President so that a constitutional balance is created between and among these offices.  Hence, the flaming asking is will Sheikh Hasina go for it in reality? Perhaps, this will not come about at all. Therefore, the demands for so-called non-party, neutral CTG shall continue, continue for a long.

What shall occur in If Sheikh Hasina leaves the chair to the Speaker of Parliament Dr. Shirin Sharmin, at present the least controversial personality having a trifling political profile and attachment with AL? Will Begum Khaleda Zia then feel free to understand and realize the depth and importance of such political sagacity by Sheikh Hasina? Or will she continue beating the drum of demand for so-called non-party, neutral CTG?  I tell both Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khaleda Zia, please be kind to us all, get rid of so-called personal vindictiveness and audacities, sit together and talk unreservedly with political acumen and maturity and thus show your statesmanship, which is the call of time. Please never forget that the nation requires light, more and more light in the fields of politics and statesmanship to move onward in tune with the rapidly taking place revolution in the realms of science, social or political, and technology. Yes, I believe that that the proposal for an all-party poll-time administration may be taken as an ‘exit point’ for BNP.