Government in driving seat, they must take the decisions

Many people did not have a clear understanding of the reforms that the interim government had undertaken. These were legal reforms, comprehensive reforms of the electoral system. In this reform process, many also lacked prior knowledge about various legal aspects. As discussions progress, the situation is becoming increasingly complex.

Some describe this government as one formed by the will of the people. Others say it is a government formed with the intent of change following a revolution. The government came to power with a pledge to uphold the Constitution. However, many changes cannot be made while staying within the bounds of the Constitution.

In the formation of the consensus commission and in the period that followed, the government played the role of a catalyst. But later, it seemed to withdraw from that role. Within the consensus commission, the political parties reached an agreement on fundamental state reforms. However, many proposals were accompanied by “notes of dissent.”

Those who submitted notes of dissent said they would go to the people after forming the government and implement the proposals according to the people’s mandate. But the government set aside the notes of dissent, which sparked a new controversy. By disregarding the dissenting opinions, the government placed the political parties in direct confrontation with one another.

The government has failed to provide a legal basis for the July Charter. Yet it has imposed the directive for a joint decision upon the political parties. Through the consensus commission, the government held discussions with political parties for eight months but could not reach a decision.

Now it is saying that the political parties should discuss among themselves and come to a joint decision. This is a rather illogical on the government’s part. No solution will come this way, which is why the political crisis has deepened further.

It is unclear whether the government made this statement out annoyance. However, through this decision, the political parties have been placed in direct confrontation with one another. The previous decisions made by the government were not accepted by all parties.

Therefore, it would be unwise to assume that everyone will accept the government’s upcoming decisions, whether it is issuing an order to implement the July Charter, holding a referendum, or any other matter. The government must now focus on how to hold elections as soon as possible.

The government must promptly call the political parties for dialogue. A way forward has to be found through these discussions. Otherwise, the national parliamentary election will become questionable, and controversy will deepen. At this moment, all responsibility lies with the government.

The government is now in the driver’s seat, not merely in the role of a catalyst. During this period of election and transition, the government must provide leadership. It must seek ways to resolve the crisis within the framework of the law. In matters of national interest, political parties have made compromises before, and it can be hoped they will do so again.

*Mahmudur Rahman Manna, President, Nagorik Oikya.