Three determinants for the days to come
Politically speaking, the year 2017 was a relatively calm one with Awami League comfortably in the driver’s seat, given the absence of street protests and any dramatic developments. But that does not mean it has been an uneventful year or lacking in significance. In fact, it should essentially be seen as a significant year for Bangladesh.
It may not have been a year of political unrest to the apparent eye, but the uncertainty and uneasiness was palpable. This was present both in the government’s actions and in public discourse. The Supreme Court and the chief justice featured quite prominently for some time in the discussions all around. The point of uncertainty lay in the shrinking space for expressing divergent views and the plummeting level of tolerance. The culture of fear spread. Enforced disappearances gripped the country with a sense of alarm. The success of the government in displaying a humane face towards the Rohingyas, was matched by its failure in dealing with the issue diplomatically. It failed to find its conceived international and regional allies by its side, indicating a failure on the part of Bangladesh to use geopolitical factors to its advantage.
The importance and significance of these three issues are determinants for the days to come in Bangladesh’s social, state and governance scenario.
Judiciary vs. the executive
On 4 January 2017 when a writ was placed on behalf of the government with the Appellate Division, appealing against the High Court verdict which scrapped the 16th amendment, there was no reason to imagine that a conclusion to the matter would end up on 11 November in Singapore. The 16th amendment to the constitution was passed on 17 September 2014 and the process to scrap it began in the very same year, when a writ in this regard was placed with the High Court in November. Then on 3 July this year, the appeal was dismissed and the full text of the judgement was published on 1 August, letting loose a series of events, unprecedented in the history of Bangladesh. The ruling party leaders and members of parliament spewed out vitriol at the verdict, the ruling party general secretary met with the chief justice, there was confusion over the chief justice’s leave, chief justice SK Sinha left the country, other judges issued statements, 11 charges were levelled against Sinha and finally the chief justice resigned. We will have to wait till 2018 for the answers to all this to emerge, if they emerge at all.
What is clear, however, is that the chief justice was the lone target of all that transpired between 1 August and 11 November, despite the judgement being passed unanimously. Do all these discussions and means of expression not exemplify the very apprehensions expressed in the judgement of the High Court and Supreme Court? The law minister, in a press conference after the verdict, said he did not agree with the judgement but accorded it due respect. His colleagues in the cabinet, however, obviously did not agree and made it obvious in their reactions. But these are just incidents.
Allegations of corruption were certainly not the real reason behind the removal of the chief justice. This was clear in the gazette issued by the government on 11 December regarding conduct of lower court judges. The new rules placed power in the hands of the president. Law minister Anisul Huq made a significant remark concerning the delay in publishing the gazette for the Bangladesh Judicial Service (Discipline) Rules 2017. He said, “This was delayed because a certain individual was trying to politicise it. With his moving away, we have been able to publish this gazette on their consensus with the executive and with the president’s approval.” But it was not just SK Sinha who had objected to this authority being held by the president under Article 116 of the constitution. Five other chief justices since 2008 have objected to this.
It is only natural in any democratic system for there to be tensions between the judiciary and executive. This is essential for a check and balance of power. But the apparent resolution to these tensions will certainly impact on the balance of the three organs of state. It may take time for this to sink it, but there is no denying that the impact is there. This will be unravelled in 2018 by the lower court judges conduct rules, the review petition of the scrapping of the 16th amendment and the writ petition in the High Court regarding Article 70.
Disappearances, missing and silence
The extent and nature of enforced disappearances brought about a big change in Bangladesh’s domestic politics in 2017. This change isn’t simply because 50 persons disappeared in the first 10 months of the year or 14 persons were abducted between August and November. The persons who were abducted included certain individuals whose disappearance created more than a ripple of fear among various levels of society. The abduction or disappearance of internationally known researcher and young teacher Mobasshar Hasan, journalist Utpal Dutta and former diplomat Maruf Zaman indicated that there was no space for free expression and that anyone could be picked up anytime. The families of the missing persons and human rights organisations over the past few years have blamed the government agencies for these disappearances and the government has been denying these accusations. The government’s denials are hardly credible. Many of them turn up later, as ‘arrested’. And more alarming are the statements issued by the government which give legitimacy to those enforced disappearances.
The silence of those fortunate enough among the missing to return (recently Mobasshar and Utpal), may seem surprising, but also understandable. The government’s failure to extract any information from them indicates that they are not interested in any information. It is only natural that these freed persons continue to live in fear.
Success in humanity, failure in diplomacy
Towards the end of August last year when a hordes of Rohingyas fled into Bangladesh to escape the ethnic cleansing of the Myanmar government and military, the Bangladesh government’s lack of preparedness was more than apparent. And when Bangladesh proposed joint action with Myanmar for border security, the government’s misguided foreign policy was exposed further. However, in the backdrop of international adverse reaction against Myanmar, prime minister Sheikh Hasina’s five-point proposal at the UN general assembly indicated that Bangladesh would use such international forums to place pressure on Myanmar for the repatriation of the 700 thousand Rohingyas. Bangladesh’s humanitarian stance and the prime minister’s firm stand won international acclaim.
However, at this critical juncture when Bangladesh’s perceived allies India, China and Russia decided to side with Myanmar instead, Bangladesh found itself diplomatically isolated. It was rather shocking that even Japan’s support could not be availed. The Bangladesh government confused matters further by maintaining that these countries were by its side. Finally Bangladesh opted to adopt the bilateral solution recommended by China, resulting in an agreement which holds no guarantee of implementation and depends on Myanmar’s whims and wishes. Bangladesh failed to take geopolitical and geostrategic advantage of the situation.
Election politics
The type of elections to be held towards the end of 2018 is a factor contributing to uncertainty in the country’s politics. Prime minister Sheikh Hasina has made it clear that she is unwilling to give in even an iota to the demands of BNP regarding the election. So the question is whether BNP will join the election if no change is brought about concerning the style of election and if party chief is convicted under the two cases against her. The time for a final answer to this puzzle has not arrived. When the BNP chief returned home after a three-month stint abroad, the enthusiasm among her supporters was tangible. This was obvious in the crowds that thronged her public meeting in the capital city in November, even though this does not indicate the party’s organisational strength or its direction in coming days. On the other hand, the ruling party’s positive vibes with conservative Islamic parties like Hefazat-e-Islam indicates that Awami League wants the presence of a political force at the grassroots, even if BNP does not come forward.
The election commission’s roadmap and its dialogue with various parties and sections of the society, has turned the country towards the election. But the election commission has still a mammoth task ahead to earn the confidence of the political parties and the people. This will include the election of Dhaka North city corporation mayor and other city corporation elections, free and fair voting and proper demarcations. But whether a participatory national election will be held or not, is a political decision. The onus is on the ruling party, in other words, upon the prime minister.
* Ali Riaz is is a professor of politics and government at Ilinois State University in the US. This piece, originally published in Prothom Alo Bangla print edition, has been rewritten in English by Ayesha Kabir.