Gap between public expectations and achievements remains

Let's start with a discussion about your book. Your book, titled 'Student-People’s Uprising: Bangladesh on a new path', was published by Prothoma. Do you think Bangladesh has really found a new path?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: The student-people’s uprising started as a protest against the quota system in government jobs. Later, the movement transformed into a popular explosion against authoritarian and dictatorial rule. This can be considered a turning point for Bangladesh. It has changed the course of politics and ended long-standing autocratic rule.

The interim government has formed several commissions for state reforms. Most of the commissions have submitted their reports, and the National Consensus Commission has started dialogues with political parties. Through this, the people will know about the attitudes of political parties; how much they want reforms and how urgently they want elections.

The Chief Adviser said in his speech that the first phase or innings of the government has ended, and the second phase has begun. How would you assess the government's activities over the past six months? How successful or unsuccessful have they been?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: The interim government came to power through the student-people uprising, and in that sense, they gained broad public support. Additionally, the advice they sought from the courts was granted.

From a certain point of view, this is an unprecedented incident. However, the people’s expectations were that there would be significant administrative, economic, and political changes, which perhaps did not come to fruition. Six months is not enough for such changes.

While there have been successes, there have also been failures. I would say that the government, backed by popular support, could have taken bolder steps.

I would like to know if you, as a political scientist, have noticed any fundamental changes in the state structure over the last six months?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: Since the government is working within the old structure, I haven't noticed any fundamental changes. There have been no major changes in public administration, law enforcement, or other institutions. There have been a few changes here and there.

What do you mean by changes? Many say this was not a revolution, but a mass uprising. Was there any alternative path?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: By the time the matter was under discussion, it was already too late. If it had been a revolutionary type of government, perhaps many things could have been done bypassing the constitution. However, since the government was formed under the constitution, such an opportunity did not arise.

The Chief Adviser himself admitted that there aren’t many people with experience in state governance in the advisory council. With the old structure remaining in place, fundamental changes to the state are not possible without bold steps. In other words, there remains a gap between the people’s expectations and what has been achieved.

The government has formed several commissions for state reforms. There is some debate regarding these commissions. Do you think the process of forming commissions was appropriate?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: The government has not really had discussions with stakeholders. Initially, the person appointed as the head of the constitutional reform commission was replaced by another person. Still, I would say that those who have been appointed to various commissions are qualified individuals. The recommendations they have made are well-thought-out and insightful.

The Chief Adviser, Professor Muhammad Yunus, said at the inaugural meeting of the National Consensus Commission that the journey has started. How long should this process continue, in your view?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: The Chief Adviser’s statement indicates that the process will continue. I assume that the roadmap for the future will be drawn through the July declaration. Issues on which there is agreement and disagreement will emerge through continuous dialogue.

I believe discussions should also take place with the civil society representatives, in addition to political parties. Civil society has been divided for a long time, which has prevented them from playing the role they should have. Some opinions regarding reforms have emerged from them, which is positive. Many citizens have profound knowledge and thoughtful perspectives on these issues, and therefore they can contribute to the reform process.

The National Consensus Commission has been given a six-month mandate. Do you think the dialogue will be completed within this time, given that political parties disagree on almost everything?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: I think it should be completed by this time. The sincerity and goodwill of the government and political parties are crucial. However, I must say that the unity among political parties seen during the student-people uprising on 5 August is no longer there. Conflicts of interest have grown.

Still, I see a positive change through the popular uprising. Until now, our politics was dominated by a two-party system - Awami League and BNP. That is no longer the case. Since the Awami League is not on the ground, many believe BNP will be the main beneficiary of the movement. Jamaat-e-Islami also considers itself a strong competitor. Students are forming new parties, and they too are a significant force.

All parties will want to show their strength in the upcoming elections. The political shift in the people’s mindset after the student-people uprising must be recognised by the political parties. They must adapt their policies accordingly. They need to understand that an election, by any means, is not the end of the matter. Therefore, political parties must be prepared for reforms. BNP, Jamaat, and other parties have also made certain proposals regarding reforms.

How prepared are the political parties for reforms, in your opinion?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: There is a significant lack of practice in internal democracy within political parties. We do not see leaders being elected from the grassroots to the central level. Instead, policies are imposed from the top to the bottom.

There is also a lack of transparency regarding election expenses and many other issues. The election commission has made certain recommendations regarding electoral reforms, and they too hope to see a change in the mindset of political parties.

In the past, both BNP and Awami League had roughly similar levels of public support in elections. For Jamaat to gain similar support, it will need to adopt a more pragmatic approach. Furthermore, this cadre-based party must rethink if it wishes to gain broader public support.

Regarding constitutional reforms, let's come to the issue of the prime minister's unilateral power. Many say that its seeds were planted in the 1972 constitution.

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: After the constitution was drafted in 1972, amendments were made - such as the declaration of emergency laws and promulgation of repressive laws - that further empowered the prime minister. Successive leaders who came to power did not alter this. Therefore, it would not be fair to solely blame the 1972 constitution.

In our country, when the same person holds the positions of leader of parliament, prime minister, and party leader, there are no limits to their power. Additionally, we have a cult of personality in our society, which has further empowered the Prime Minister.

After the mass uprising in 1990, the parliamentary system was restored, but in the Rules of Business, the powers of the President were transferred entirely to the Prime Minister. Under authoritarian rule, we have seen one person accumulate all the powers over the past 15 years or more.

Much discussion and debate is directed to the constitutional reform commission. What is your assessment?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: It is assumed that the country will follow the parliamentary system. In this system, the position of President is mostly ceremonial. The reform proposal suggests keeping the parliamentary system but empowering the President. There has also been talk of direct elections. If the President is empowered, it will no longer be a parliamentary system but will shift to a hybrid model.

I believe that the system should be designed so that the President cannot dismiss laws passed by Parliament, as is the case in the United States. Some point to India’s parliamentary system, but it does not apply here because, in Bangladesh, the President is elected based on the Prime Minister’s choice.

The reform proposal also suggests changes to Article 70 of the constitution. What would be the problem if it were completely abolished?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: Article 70 was introduced based on an experience during the Pakistan era, where governments changed seven times in 10 years. It was implemented to prevent the horse trading of MPs. However, the conditions attached to it have severely restricted the freedom of MPs.

The primary function of parliament is to legislate and oversee the executive branch. Under the current system, that opportunity does not exist. Article 70 also involves party discipline. Even if the article is relaxed, I don’t believe it will increase the power of MPs under the current party structure.

The proposal suggests a bicameral legislature, with proportional representation and an increase in the number of seats. What do you think?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: We must proceed through trial and error. The proposal to increase seats, as suggested by the Constitutional Reform Commission, seems reasonable. When the 300 parliamentary seats were created in Bangladesh, the population was 75 million. Now, it is 180 million.

Besides, in the lower house, we see political party dominance everywhere. A bicameral system could help balance this. The proposal includes proportional seats but not entirely. There needs to be a change in the party nomination process to allow experienced politicians to come forward.

If the interim government implements the reforms it has proposed, we hope for a good election. But can a good election guarantee an effective parliament and democracy? We have seen good elections earlier, such as in 1991, 1996, 2001, and 2008...

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: If there is a qualitative change in representation - such as increased female representation and inclusion of marginalised groups in society - then I hope we will see a qualitative change in Parliament. We must keep in mind that a single-party majority can pose a risk to democracy. This is not good for the government either. A parliamentary system requires strict oversight of the executive. If a single-party majority is achieved, this oversight is lost. To make parliamentary committees effective, the role of the opposition must be strengthened. Important committee heads should be from the opposition, as in the UK.

The students leading the movement are forming a new party, claiming it represents a new political settlement. They say the old parties are failing to meet the people's hopes and aspirations. Do you agree?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: If we look at the activities of the traditional parties, there seems to be a void. In that case, if the youth form a new party, they may fill that gap. However, I also see many issues in the formation process of the new party. There are internal conflicts, uncertainties regarding leadership, organisational structure, funding, and participation of women and other groups. If they cannot incorporate multi-dimensional political aspirations, the dreams they are showing to the public will fade. A new party cannot be confined to cities; it must reach the rural areas as well. They need to ensure internal democracy and become much more tolerant. Their relationships should be dialectical but not confrontational. Unfortunately, some confrontational aspects are emerging.

The end of authoritarian rule occurred through the July-August student-people uprising, which was a positive step. However, at the same time, there has been a rise in extremism in the state and society. Various places are seeing the destruction of sculptures, tombs, shrines, and so on. Baul songs are being banned, and girls' football is being prohibited. How do you view this?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: In the past, political opponents were branded as fundamentalist and extremist. Now, different political narratives are being used for the same purpose. Still, I would say that Bangladesh is a tolerant, democratic country. These actions will not gain broad support from the people. Anyone can express their opinions here, but no one can impose their views outside the constitution and democratic values. Extremism is never desirable.

You mentioned earlier that we were in a two-party system for a long time, with the Awami League and BNP alternating in power. Now that Awami League is absent from the political scene, what does the future political landscape look like?

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: After the student-people's uprising, leaders and activists of the Awami League have been largely absent. Many have left the country, while others are in hiding or in jail.

In this situation, no party can function. There has been such a large-scale uprising, yet they have no statements on the matter. For the Awami League to engage in politics, they must acknowledge responsibility for the killings that took place during the student uprising.

There is a pressure from the students for the Awami League to stay out of the elections. Meanwhile, the international community is calling for an inclusive election. In fact, the Awami League's politics and the opportunities in the upcoming election are tied to their current relevance.

The Awami League must adapt to Bangladesh's new reality in their political approach. Those who are the true culprits and against whom cases have been filed must be fairly prosecuted. The end of narrow political culture in the country's party system and politics, along with the promotion of tolerance, is especially desirable.

Thank you

Al Masud Hasanuzzaman: Thank you too

**This interview appeared in the print and online editions of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten in English by Rabiul Islam