Quota reforms committee should be realistic

The quota system in public service exists in various countries of South Asia, not just Bangladesh. It is the executive that decides on the policy regarding these quotas. It is never the judiciary that gives directives in this regard. So it is not surprising when attorney general Mahbubey Alam says this is a matter to be decided upon by the executive.

However, during the student uprising for reforms in the quota system, the Bangladesh government responded by referring to a court verdict that obstructed the reforms. In short, they maintained that the executive could do nothing to change the existing system where there was a 30 per cent quota in public service. The Supreme Court, they pointed out, had issued directives to retain that 30 per cent quota. However, after this was declared in parliament, the subsequent statements issued by various quarters made it clear that the court had merely put forward an ‘observation’. In legal terms, implementing an ‘observation’ is optional. The executive is under no obligation to follow such observations.

Our investigations clearly indicate that whatever verdict or observation may have been passed, it has in no way restricted the executive’s authority to being about reforms in the quota system. The court’s stand could never be considered an obstacle and still cannot be so.

We are happy with the attorney general’s statement, albeit rather late, that this is a matter of the executive and that it has been passed on to a quota reforms committee headed by the cabinet secretary. However, it is a matter of concern that neither the reforms committee not any political quarter of the government has openly spoken in favour of the attorney general’s statement. Unless the matter is sorted out soon, this will be seen as a sort of escapism in the part of the executive, or a ploy to delay the matter.

The attorney general is the senior most law official of the state. The committee can take an independent decision on the basis of his observation. And accordingly, the cabinet will have to announce the next policy decision without any further ado.

The freedom fighters are valiant sons and daughters of the soil. Before Bangladesh, many countries of the world have set precedents of what can be done for these heroes and their dependents. It would not be difficult for Bangladesh to follow such examples.

This issue should not be viewed as a matter of political winning or losing in light of the recent quota reform movement and the stance of the ruling party in this connection. The matter should be seen in the greater interests of the nation.

The freedom fighters made great sacrifices so that Bangladesh could stand proud in the comity of nations. The state certainly must do its duty towards their offspring. But that does mean, 46 years since independence, the quota percentage should be higher than that of merit in public service.

We are confident that the ruling party policy makers are aware of what step will go in the interest of the country. It is the responsibility of the government to guide the committee to take the appropriate decision regarding reforms in the quota system. Election politics should not influence this decision.