11th JS: No accountability without fair elections

The data and statistics that Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) revealed in its study on the 11th national parliament were unwanted, but not unexpected. There have been questions at home and abroad on the credibility of the election in 2018, through which this parliament has been formed. If the election is not fair, the elected representatives do not have accountability. Though the 11th national parliament will not be a single example of it, this will be one of the major examples.

The main function of parliament is to formulate laws for the welfare of the people and hold the executive branch of the government accountable for its operation, but our lawmakers are extremely reluctant on these two issues. Parliamentary committees are very strong in countries with a long tradition of parliamentary democracy. Members of the opposition are nominated as the head of various important committees including the public accounts committee to ensure transparency and accountability of the government. On the other hand, we have established such a parliamentary democracy where the opposition boycotts parliament year after year or the parliament is formed without the real opposition. Like the 10th parliament, those who have played the role of opposition in the 11th parliament also went to polls in coalition with the ruling party. A partner of the ruling party can never be a real opposition in parliament.

As the parliament has no real opposition, the parliamentary committees never functioned properly. No parliamentary standing committees could fulfil the criteria on sitting at least once a month. The reason is most of the lawmakers have no accountability to people or they do not understand the division between legislative and executive branches.

The rate of lawmakers’ attendance in parliament sessions is also frustrating. At least 60 out of 350 members of parliament need to join parliament sessions to avoid a quorum crisis. According to the TIB study, the state faces a loss of Tk 892.8 million due to a quorum crisis from the first to the 22nd session of the 11th parliament. Lawmakers must bear the responsibility. If the parliament leader can present 94 per cent of the total time of the parliament sessions, why can others not do so? They cannot do it because many of them remain busy in lobbying or other activities at the secretariat while parliament goes into session.

According to the TIB study, 17 per cent of the total time of the parliamentary proceedings was spent on legislative affairs, which is slightly higher than the previous parliament. But ruling party lawmakers spent 20 per cent of the time praising the prime minister and Awami League president during the discussion on the vote of thanks to the president's speech, which is completely unacceptable. They can do so in party programmes, why did they do it at parliament spending the hard-earned money of the people?

In fact, a parliament becomes effective when the ruling party and opposition are present actively. When no actual opposition exists in parliament, it by no means becomes effective. The Cyber Security Act, which we think is a changed form of media freedom and civil rights-stanching Digital Security Act, has been passed in the 11th national parliament ignoring the objections of stakeholders. The new law could not relieve the concerns that were caused by the Digital Security Act. In this case, there is no fundamental difference between the 10th parliament and the 11th parliament.