At a point of time when differences among the political parties have been widening over the reform proposals, a platform under the name of Nagorik Coalition (Citizens' Coalition) arranged an important dialogue. The dialogue, held on 11 May, was joined by advisors of the interim government, leaders of various political parties, the heads of certain reforms commissions and representatives of civil society.
A seven-point proposal was also brought forward by Nagorik Jote, and this may help in untangling the knot. But the statements made by the political leaders at the dialogue seemed to indicate that none of them were budging from their respective stands. This was a repetition of the statements made to the national consensus commission. There was a lot of talk, but no conclusion.
Along with other issues discussed at the dialogue was the matter of the prime minister's unlimited powers. Referring to the 11th amendment of the constitution, made in 1991, the vice chairman of the national consensus commission Ali Riaz said, "When Bangladesh entered the parliamentary system, then all the unimaginable powers bestowed upon the president, were all handed over to the prime minister."
We are also aware that the absolute power granted to the president under the one-party BAKSAL system in 1975 was later enjoyed by all the subsequent presidents in the name of multi-party democracy. In our country, whether it is one-party or multi-party rule, presidential or parliamentary governance, everything revolves around the individual. The debate by BNP and other parties about how many times one person can become prime minister is also centered on the individual. First come to an agreement on the fundamental reforms, then the question of term limits can be addressed.
Our politicians forget that in order to establish democracy in the country, it is essential to establish democracy within the political party too. Regardless of what the constitutions of these parties state, there is no practice of electing their leadership in a democratic manner. The leader is decided upon even before the party council takes place.
Many of the key issues regarding state reforms that are being discussed in recent time, have been addressed by former caretaker government advisor Akbar Ali Khan in his book 'Obak Bangladesh: Bichitra Chholonajale Rajneeti. Published in 2017, the book presents a meticulous analysis of the fundamental principles of the state and its institutions.
Akbar Ali Khan posed the question as to whether the executive was following the path of the elected autocracy. We saw the full-fledged manifestation of that during the rule of Awami League. He also wrote, in terms of power, the authority of the prime minister of Bangladesh is comparable to that of the Bourbon monarchs of France, the czars of Russia, and the Mughal emperors.
According to Article 55 of the Constitution: 1. There shall be a Cabinet for Bangladesh having the Prime Minister at its head and comprising also such other Ministers as the Prime Minister may from time to time designate. 2. The executive power of the Republic shall, in accordance with this Constitution, be exercised by or on the authority of the Prime Minister. 3. The Cabinet shall be collectively responsible to the Parliament.
The constitution of 1972 elevated the president above all other citizens of the state but did not grant any real power. According to Article 48(3) of the Constitution, apart from the appointment of the prime minister, the president was to act on the advice of the prime minister in all matters. In 1991, the issue of appointing the Chief Justice was added.
The prime minister wins a seat in the election and the ministers too win seats in the election. They are all people's representatives, but the prime minister has limitless powers.
In Bangladesh, under the parliamentary system, a prime minister rule has been established instead of a cabinet rule. In other countries with of cabinet rule, the ministers are not subordinate to the prime minister, but the prime minister is considered 'first among equals' among colleagues. But in Bangladesh, the system that has been in place is one where the prime minister is the head of the cabinet and the others are subordinate. The prime minister can appoint any member of parliament as a minister at will and can dismiss any minister at any time. They can even appoint ministers from the opposition party.
From 2014 to 2018, Jatiya Party was in the opposition in parliament. Yet, several ministers and state ministers came from that party. This was an attempt to portray that the parliament had a real opposition, though that was not the case. In a parliamentary democracy, one cannot simultaneously be part of the cabinet and the opposition.
According to Akbar Ali Khan, the prime minister’s power was not increased through legislation alone. Regulations have also granted the prime minister unchecked authority. A separate secretariat was established to execute the prime minister’s powers and this structure has been rapidly expanding.
During the past tenure of the Awami League, the prime minister’s Office was staffed with six advisers holding the rank of minister, two secretaries and a vast bureaucratic structure consisting of additional, joint and assistant secretaries. Officials from this secretariat often interfered in the operations of ministries overseen by other ministers. As a result, the ministers themselves were reduced to mere lackeys who followed orders.
Under the parliamentary system in Bangladesh, the same individual has long held the roles of prime minister, Leader of the House, and head of the ruling party. This has been true during the tenures of both BNP and Awami League. As a result, one individual ended up wielding absolute control over the government, the Parliament and the political party.
The reform commission proposal says that no person should simultaneously serve as prime minister, head of a political party and Leader of the House.
This proposal may not seem feasible, given the prevailing political realities of Bangladesh. However, we must move in that direction if we want to replace individual rule with democracy, and a prime minister-dominated system with cabinet-led democratic governance.
We once rejected the presidential system of government because it was centered on the individual. The people had to struggle long and hard for that, from 1975 to 1990. But when the parliamentary system was established in 1991 through national consensus, all the powers of the president were effectively transferred to the prime minister. Laws and regulations were crafted in such a way that the prime minister remained supreme.
The prime minister wins a seat in the election and the ministers too win seats in the election. They are all people's representatives, but the prime minister has limitless powers.
Just as Article 70 restricts the general members, the ministers too are at the mercy of the prime minister. The prime minister decides who gets which ministry, whether they are qualified for the job or not.
During Khaleda Zia’s first term, when the opposition was in a movement demanding a caretaker government, Sir Ninian proposed a compromise, that the election-time cabinet would include equal numbers of ministers from both the ruling and opposition parties, with the outgoing prime minister remaining as the head of government. The opposition rejected the proposal on the grounds that all power rested with the prime minister and the other ministers were mere figureheads.
Ironically, it was the opposition party that had fought to establish the caretaker system, that later abolished it while in power, citing a court verdict. When the Awami League government was preparing to pass the 15th Amendment, there was widespread support, both inside and outside the party, for retaining the caretaker system.
Even the country’s top legal experts were in favour of keeping the caretaker government system. Yet, it was abolished by the unilateral decision of the prime minister at the time. In other words, an individual's wishes took precedence over democracy. Who can guarantee that this will not be repeated in the future?
* Sohrab Hassan is joint editor of Prothom Alo and a poet
(The opinions expressed are the author’s own.)