Sycophancy versus dissension

I often criticise the government. From the reaction of the people, I can understand that my criticism is not unjustified. For example, I took part in a BBC Bangla discussion three days after the 7 January election. Around 5000 comments on this discussion appeared online, 80 per of which were praise.

I was not surprised. Everyone is well aware that the anti-incumbency sentiment is high in problem-ridden countries like Bangladesh. When people are angry with the government, they respond through their votes. When the right to vote doesn't exist, it is the dissenters that voice their anger. So when praises are piled upon me or anyone like myself, the credit goes more to the government for its failure rather than to us.

It is not than I relish criticising. I too want to praise the government for its good deeds. The government has removed a health minister accused of corruption and appointed a dedicated physician like Samantalal Sen in his stead. I immediately felt that this deserved praise. Ministers who had various allegations against them have been dropped or placed in lesser important ministries. It felt good to learn this too.

But I felt the best a few days ago when I took a ride on the metro rail. I have travelled by the metro rail in 15 to 20 countries. Even then, I was amazed travelling in our metro rail. We hope it plays a vital role in assuaging the sufferings in the city traffic jams and also reduces the economic pressure of  commute. Before that I travelled on the elevated expressway, Padma Bridge and the Karnaphuli tunnel. All of these seemed more or less important work.

The government has done other good work over these past 15 years. The safety net programme has expanded significantly, the demand for power and energy has been met to a great extent, certain investment-friendly policies and special zones have been created, there has been development in the IT sector too. I was also happy to see the airport management went I went to perform Hajj last year.

If I could end here, many people would be pleased. The government would be pleased too. But one-sided praise with no questions asked, amounts to sycophancy. The government has no dearth of sycophants. Quite to the contrary, their numbers are on the rise as they receive all sorts of perks and prizes. In fact, there are many in the service of the state who break the rules and violate the law, in obsequiousness towards the government.

So I feel there is no need for servility and sycophancy towards the government. The government rather needs critics who can objectively discuss the pros and cons.

The government needs institutional accountability and transparency. According to the constitution of Bangladesh, this responsibility is to be carried out by the formal institutions of accountability. Accordingly, if there was an actual opposition in parliament, if the parliamentary committees functioned properly, if the judiciary was independent, if the various commissions (anti-corruption commission, human rights commission, information commission) kept watch on the government persons, then the government would have to be much more dedicated in establishing good governance.

Outside of these institutions, there are the informal institutions of accountability, like the media and civil society. Here too there is control by repressive laws and the scope for the government to apply unlawful pressure. It is because of the failure of the state institutions that the citizens have to take up the task of criticism even more.

There are examples around us of what consequence a country faces if there is no criticism of the government, if there are divergent views in society. We did not fight the war of liberation to establish such a country. From 1948 to 1972, not once did we speak of establishing a state system like that of China, Cambodia or the Philippines.

Alongside improving the lot of the people, we spoke of voting rights, multi-party democracy, freedom of speech, independence of the judiciary. By economic development we meant freedom from disparity, freedom from exploitation and the uprooting of corruption. All this is clearly stated in the 1972 constitution and the national assembly debates. It is clearly enunciated there that the people have the right to protest if there is any deviation from this.

That is why alongside praising the government, there must be space in society to practice dissent too. There must be scope in praise too, to ask questions. There must be many parties, many views and many paths in society. That is what the spirit of the liberation war is all about.

There is scope to question various praiseworthy tasks of the government. Take for example, the metro rail, the expressway, Padma Bridge and such extremely important construction work. We have read in so many media reports that the expenditure on these projects was much higher than even in developed countries. There are also allegations of extensive corruption. But no investigations have been made into these allegations.

Needless to say, these projects were carried out with taxpayers' money. Bangladesh is a rare country in the world where indirect taxes (like VAT) are higher than direct taxes (income tax). That means the contribution of others in such projects is much higher than the upper class of society. So corruption in these projects means handing over the money of the common people to a handful of individuals. So when gazing in awe at a structure like Padma Bridge, it is only natural that questions pop into the mind -- why was the expenditure so high, who stood to gain? Rather than being angered at anyone who asks such questions, the government must give truthful answers.

I praised Samantalal Sen being made the health minister. At the same time I can't help but asking, has he become the minister of a government that really represents the people? I know the government people will say, what could we do it BNP did not come to the election? But my question is, could anyone have faith in elections under a partisan government after the nighttime election of 2018? Also, with the mass arrests and harassment of the BNP leaders and activists, and the High Court's recent ruling that convicted persons cannot contest in the election while their appeals are being heard, was there any opportunity for them to contest freely in the election?

The government now maintains that the voter turnout was 41 per cent, thus depicting the election as representative of the people. But many people find this figure unbelievable. There are allegations of child voters, fakes votes and more. There is allegation of widespread rigging too.

Such questions hover above most of the development and success stories. Fear can be used to suppress such questions, but doesn't make the questions go away. The government should understand that amidst the applause of the fair-weather friends, there is need for real voices too.

Ingratiation can be satisfying. But it is harmful. After all, the there is a price to pay the sycophants. They must be given impunity too. The government is in a dilemma then. Dissenting voices are uncomfortable. But these are beneficial. These voices help the government along the way.

Sycophants had taken a stance against independence in 1971. Dissenters and protestors fought the war and won independence for the country. It was the same during the struggle for democracy during the Ershad government and the 1/11 government.

If we believe in the spirit of the liberation war, we must nurture diverse views.      

* Asif Nazrul is a writer, researcher and professor of the law department law at Dhaka University.

* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir