Names not disclosed, we remain mere subjects

Those who are aware of current events already know that the search committee for the formation of the election commission has declared that they will not disclose the 10 names to be recommended to the president. We will not be able to know which political parties, professional bodies and individuals have proposed the names.

I was talking over phone with a lawyer of the western world. He practices in his own country. He also has legal activities in certain other countries. That's how I was introduced to him about two decades ago. He had been engaged in a project dealing with legal issues in Bangladesh. I talk to him maybe once in ever few months. A few days ago he told me that he applied for the post of High Court judge and was busy for the last three months for this purpose. It is a process and may take five months form him to know whether he will be selected. In the application form for a judge of the High Court, an aspirant has to mention 20 names of persons who are familiar with his or her work. First of all he has to mention names of six to eight judges under whom he conducted cases.

Simultaneously he has to mention around six to eight lawyers against whom he has fought a legal battle in complex cases. He or she has to mention four to five more names of those who are familiar with his work at different times of his life. The search committee to appoint judges will talk to these 20 people and will take their opinion. This process takes three to six months. In the application, he has to give information of his education in law, what he has done as a lawyer, where he has worked, which big cases he conducted, whether he is involved in other work related to law, whether he has any research published in journals and any book published.

When we talk and demand transparency in the process of appointing the chief election commissioner and other election commissioners, we never imagine the transparency of recruiting judges in those other countries. Our demand is very little. It is the right of the citizens to know the names, who proposed which names, and on the basis of what qualification and skill the search committee has selected the names to recommend to the president.

The constitution has taught us that people are the owners of the republic. This republic is of the citizens and ours. When there was no concept of the state in the past, everything was owned by the king. Our forefathers were subjects of the emperors, the kings and the zemindars. They silently accepted any decision taken by the emperor, king or landlord. The subjects had no right to know or raise questions.

We are lucky that we have be upgraded from subjects to citizens. But we are unlucky that many of us have yet to understand this. The citizens have the right to ask why and what grounds decisions are being taken, no matter how important an official is involved.

Bangladesh was established for the empowerment of the people not to curb the power of the people. We must get back this power today or tomorrow, but not beyond that

People are the owners of the republic. This power of the people has been handed over to different organisations to exercise it on our behalf. We have handed over our executive power to the government, we have given our power of justice to the judiciary and we have given our power of law formulation to the lawmakers. But we have given these powers on many conditions. If we hand over the power to run the country to any political party, we hand over for at best five years. After every five years the ruling party has to come to us and ask whether we want to give five more years. This is election.

Through the election, we will decide whether we are happy over those who are running the country or we would give the charge to any other for the next five years. It is our jurisdiction to whom, how and why we will give this power. The highest justification of Bangladesh becoming a Bangladesh in the truest sense, is that none can curb this power and none can thwart the power of people to change the government through the election. Now if the election commission is formed in such a way that likes or dislike are not reflected in the election, then our power has no value. If were are too fearful to say we are content or discontent, then our country will no longer remain a republic. It will become a monarchy.

If the next election commission is formed in such a way and our decisions are not reflected properly in the election under it, then there is no need for the commission. If another election commission is formed secretly and without informing us as in the case of the 2014 and 2018 elections, our ownership and power as citizens will be snatched away from us. Thus we owners will become mere subjects. We don't want to become subjects from being owners. That is why we want the election commission to be formed transparently. It is our failure it did not happen in the past, it did not happen in the last 50 years. We could not establish our ownership properly. But now we are united in this demand.

Those whom we have given charge, will try to keep us as subjects. As a result, their power will be unilateral, it won't be our power. In last 50 years, we descended to the level of mere subjects. and will perhaps continue to descend a few more days. But our pathetic condition will surely be temporary. After all, Bangladesh was established for the empowerment of the people not to curb the power of the people. We must get back this power today or tomorrow, but not beyond that.

Dr. Shadeen Malik is a senior lawyer at the Supreme Court and law teacher at Gono Bishwabidyalay

This article, originally published in Prothom Alo print and online edition, has been rewritten in English by Rabiul Islam.