A caretaker government in a parliamentary democracy merely performs the rudimentary duties of the st

A caretaker government in a Parliamentary democracy merely performs the rudimentary duties of the state.

CHAPTER-ONE Introduction 1.1.

Definition: When Parliament dissolved on Thursday, 11 November 1999, all Members of the Dewan

Rakyat would have ceased to receive their allowance as from that day onwards. This is a basic principle of the Parliamentary System.

In this connection, it has to be pointed out that with the dissolution of Parliament, the status and function of the government also changes accordingly.

From 12 November, the government becomes a caretaker government with caretaker functions.

A caretaker government in a Parliamentary democracy merely performs the rudimentary duties of the state. Apart from maintaining law and order, it ensures that government machinery continues to function so that the day-to-day task of administration can be carried out.

From a moral standpoint, a caretaker government cannot initiate new programmes or launch new projects in the name of the government. This is an unwritten role of electoral competition in a Parliamentary democracy. For the party that acts as the caretaker government is also a participant in the election. If it transgresses its caretaker functions by using the authority that a government enjoys in ordinary circumstances, it would have an unfair advantage over its other competitors in the election.1 Caretaker Government - In the parlance of institutional government, a caretaker government is one which normally takes care of state administration for an interim period until the regular new government is formed. In established parliamentary system, there is a convention of transformation of the outgoing government into a caretaker government for the time being before the holding of general election. Such temporary government exists only to 1

Please Visit: http://www.aliran.com/oldsite/high9910b.htm- Last Visited:-13.07.2009

perform day to day administrative jobs, and is not supposed to deal with policy initiating functions which may influence the election results. During the period the caretaker government maintains neutral status for ensuring free and fair general elections. In the parliamentary framework, after the dissolution of one ministry, the practice of establishing caretaker government for organizing general polls has been observed in all democratic countries.

1.2 Nature and Scope: In politics, a caretaker government rules temporarily. A caretaker government is often set up following a war until stable democratic rule can be restored, or installed, in which case it is often referred to as a provisional government. In some countries the term is used to describe the government that operates in the interim period between the normal dissolution of parliament for the purpose of holding an election and the formation of a new government after the election results are known.

Caretaker governments may also be put in place when a government in a parliamentary system is defeated in a motion of no confidence, or in the case when the house to which the government is responsible is dissolved, to rule the country for an interim period until an election is held and a new government is formed. This type of caretaker government is adopted in Bangladesh where an advisor council led by the former chief judge rules the country for 3 months before an elected government takes over. This usually occurs either immediately after an election in which there is no clear victor or if one coalition government collapses and a new one must be negotiated.

Caretakers: Caretakers, similarly, are individuals who fill seats in government temporarily without ambitions to continue to hold office on their own. This is particularly true with regard to U.S. Senators who are appointed to office by the governor of their state following a vacancy created by the death or resignation of a sitting senator. Sometimes governors wish to run for the seat themselves in the next election but do not want to be accused of unfairness by appointing themselves in the interim. Also, sometimes they do not wish to be seen as taking sides within a group of party factions or prejudicing the outcome of a primary election by picking someone who is apt to become an active candidate for the position. At one time,

widows of politicians were often selected as caretakers to succeed their late husbands; this custom is rarely exercised today, as it could be viewed by some as nepotism.

In a similar vein, Nelson Rockefeller was said to be a caretaker Vice President of the United States (1974–1977). He was nominated for the office by President Gerald Ford, who had succeeded the resigned President Richard Nixon. Rockefeller made it apparent that he had no further presidential ambitions of his own (unlike many Vice Presidents), despite having run for the office three times in the past, and he had no intention of even running for a full term in the vice presidential office. He kept his intention when Ford's running mate in the 1976 presidential election was Senator Bob Dole. •

One that is employed to look after or take charge of goods, property, or a person; a custodian.

•

One that temporarily performs the duties of an office: The government resigned, but the premier served as caretaker until new leaders could be elected

Caretaker government of Bangladesh is a form of administrative system, in which the country is ruled during the interim period between the removal of the old government and the takeover of the newly elected government. As the outgoing government hands over their power, caretaker government comes into place. The main objective of the caretaker government is to create an environment in which election could be held in a free and fair manner. The administration is generally distributed between the advisers. Chief Adviser and the other advisers are committed for their activities to the President. Caretaker government was first introduced in 1990 when three party alliances jointly made a demand to appeal for it. In 2006, the system is activated for the fourth time. It was again reformed on 11 January 2007 and the newly appointed government is running the nation since. Current Chief Adviser is Fakhruddin Ahmed conjoint by ten other Advisers.

1.3 Aims and Objective: The President enjoys greater say during the caretaker government. He looks after the Ministry of Defence. During this period of Caretaker government, the President is not the figurehead as he is under the elected government. The President appoints the Chief Adviser under the options enumerated in the Constitution (Article 58C). Under this Article, the President is empowered to appoint the Chief Adviser from among citizens the current Chef Adviser (the executive head of the government) has met the criteria of Article 58C (5) of the

Constitution. The President appoints Advisers on the advice of the Chief Adviser. Although the President appoints the Advisers, the Chief Adviser has theoretically the responsibility in selecting Advisers and he allocates the portfolio among the Advisers. Under the care-taker government both the President and the Chief Adviser are required to closely work with each other. During the Latifur government in 2001, he acknowledged the support and cooperation he received from President Justice Shahabuddin (The Caretaker Days: 2002).

The Chief Adviser cannot exercise the executive authority like the Prime Minister.

Furthermore the Chief Adviser cannot remove an Adviser, while the Prime Minister can dismiss or remove any cabinet minister. The scope of power of the Chief Adviser is limited.

The Chief Adviser shall act in accordance with the advice of the Non-Party Caretaker government. The word "shall" has been used in Article 58B (3). The Non-Party Caretaker government, as referred to in Article 58B, means in reality the Council of Advisers. The Council of Advisers is collectively responsible to the President. This means that all Advisers including the Chief Adviser would ordinarily take decision collectively. It is a collegial function and no Adviser can claim that he is not responsible for a decision of made by the Council of Advisers. Advisers are of course responsible individually when they decide within their portfolio. The Constitutional provisions make the primary responsibility of the NonParty government to ensure an impartial administration in which the Election Commission can discharge its duty to hold an impartial, free, fair and credible general election.

Many writers have suggested that to create a congenial environment, the Non-Party Care taker government may address, among others, the following: (a) Reorganizing administration & election commission (b) Law and order situation, including elimination of black money, godfathers and muscle men from society (c) Collection of unauthorized arms and weapons, d) Updating election laws including RPO 1972 (e) Educating the voters, and

(f) Free media and easy access of all political parties to the state controlled media (radio and TV). (g) Separation of lower judiciary from the government's control 1.4 Importance: When the present caretaker government came to power on the backdrop of 1/11 everyone was delighted and all were relieved of the tension of conflicting election and its consequences.

The new government declared its objectives of conducting a free fair election acceptable to all and a society free from corruption.

All were in peaceful mood. But the mood changes when the government started to arrest the political leaders, beaucrates and businessmen on the charge of the corruption. Initially BNP men were arrested in greater number, but later few AL leaders were arrested. And afterwards in the middle of drama AL chief Hasina, then BNP chief Khaleda were arrested on charge of corruption.

Government declared crusade against the corruption.

The political parties fall apart from the government, businessmen felt insecure and beaucrates felt

scare.

The consecutives food hit Bangladesh and submerged 1/3 rd of the country in the middle of 2007. Government had to face lone battle against the flood with out the participation from the political parties.

Then the incident of Dhaka University, Government had to impose the Curfew over the emergency rule to tackle the situation and to prevent spread to other parts of the country.

Then came the Sidr, the most devastating cyclone so far in the area which cost thousands of lives and make the economy of the area totally dead. Govt had to make people survived by special food arrangement. The political parties only negligibly participated.

And throughout the tenure, the government had to fight with the price hike of the essentials, the legacy of which is still continuing.

Now, when the government started dialogue, the political parties are showing very lukewarm response, especially the big parties are still reluctant to sit with the government until the two top leaders are not allowed to participate in the talk and in the election.

So far, no care taker government had to face so many obstacles from the political parties, not to say of the businessmen.

Questions about the constitutional legality of the government also came up. Our constitution only permits a Care taker government for three months. It would have to complete its task of arranging a free fair election by this time. This government is staying over 1 year and will continue for 2 years, the length which is not liked my many political parties.

This government also made some reforms in some constitutional bodies including PSC, EC, and Judiciary etc. These constitutional reforms would need the approval by parliament.

Would it have been safe for a caretaker government to be limited within three months because of its constitutional bar and political difficulties? Would it have been wise for the present political government to be limited within 3 months and be aimed for a fair election only? Would it not wise for the CTG to make amendments in the laws and not go after the corrupts physically? Would it not be enough for Bangladesh to have a free and fair election?

Didn’t the government create a complexity of the situation by itself and create a burden which would be difficult for them to dispose off?

The present caretaker government has taken upon itself a daunting task which proved to be difficult so far and will the government able to come out of the conglomerate safely and cleanly?

It is true that if the objectives of the present caretaker government is fulfilled and the government become successful, it will be a historical achievement for Bangladesh and for its democracy.

CHAPTER-TWO Historical Background of the Caretaker Government

2.1. History of the Caretaker Government: A caretaker government rules temporarily. A caretaker government is often set up following a war until stable democratic rule can be restored, or installed, in which case it is often referred to as a provisional government.

Caretaker governments may also be put in place when a government in a parliamentary system is defeated in a motion of no confidence or in the case when the house to which the government is responsible is dissolved, to rule the country for an interim period until an election is held and a new government is formed. This type of caretaker government is

adopted in Bangladesh where an advisor council led by the former chief judge rules the country for 3 months before an elected government takes over. In systems where coalition governments are frequent a caretaker government may be installed temporarily while negotiations to form a new coalition take place. This usually occurs either immediately after an election in which there is no clear victor or if one coalition government collapses and a new one must be negotiated.

The concept of Non-Party Caretaker Government is not new in annals of governance of Bangladesh. The first Non-Party Caretaker Government was set up on December 6, 1990. So the precedent is already there in the Bangladesh. The act, transaction and deeds etc. done by the said Caretaker Government has been ratified by the constitution Eleventh Amendment Act-1991. The erstwhile B.N.P. Government by applying the implied Power of the 11th Amendment by following the already set up precedent could hand over/transfer to the Chief Justice of Bangladesh without all owing so much of blood, loss of National wealth and prestige. There was no necessity to introduce 13th Amendment in a hurry in the controversial Parliament. The Constitution (thirteenth Amendment) Act 1996 dated 28.3.1996 is a belated, and a redundant phenomenon. The bushed Tradition, practice and procedure of Parliament have not been given due care and respect. There was no national consensus about the 13th Amendment.

In the period since independence, there was, however, a gradual public alienation from the election process owing to alleged electoral malpractices. As such, election results were always a foregone conclusion rendering no positive effects on the political process. The crisis of people's confidence in the stage-managed election system reached its peak during the rule of General hussain m Ershad. Restoration of democracy through fair polls was ultimately transformed into a united anti-Ershad movement by the combined opposition parties with a forceful demand for a neutral caretaker government. Opposition formula for the formation of neutral caretaker government was categorically mentioned in the 1990 Joint Declaration of the Three (political) Party Alliances. The Declaration specified inter alia that the political alliances would participate in the elections only when conducted by a neutral non-partisan caretaker government; but before that Ershad government would have to be forced to resign and an interim caretaker government would be formed; thereafter, election commission would be reconstituted by the caretaker government to hold free and fair election.

In 1991 After the Formation of Parliament a Bill for Neutral Caretaker Government, For Holding free, fair and impartial Election In future, was placed In the Second Session of the 5th Parliament On behalf Of Jamat-E-Islami. But The Ruling Party did not allow the Bill to be moved in the House. Then In September 1993 Awami League and Jatiya Party Deposited Two separate Bills for Neutral Caretaker government. In the Secretariat of The Parliament For Introducing the Same in the House Of the Nation. But The Said Two Bills Were Never allowed coming to the House. Awami League proposed for amendment of the article-56 And In place of Clause 4 of Art. 56A clause stating for the period between and after the dissolution of Parliament and until the declaration of The Result of the National Election. The President of the Republic shall invite The Chief Justice of Bangladesh to form the interim Caretaker Government. Awami league also Proposed for Insertion of three More Clauses e.g.a) The Chief Justice shall not be a candidate in the National Election. The Chief Justice shall form a small Advisory Council with neutral persons. b) The Caretaker Government shall hand over the power to the newly elected Government as soon as possible they take oath office. c) The duties performed by the Chief Justice as head of the Caretaker Government shall be deemed to have been done in addition to his own duties and there will be no impediment on the way for the Chief Justice to return to his own original post and to discharge his duties as Chief Justice after handing over the power of interim Caretaker Government.

Jatiya Party had proposed for amendment of Art. 123 of the constitution. J. P. proposed for addition of a few more clauses after clause 4 of Art. 123. It was proposed that on the date of declaration of he date of election the Prime Minister should resign and the President to his satisfaction would appoint Prime Minister for interim period of the said Prime Minister would form an interim Caretaker Government as successor to the outgoing Government. No member of tins Government should be a member of any Political Party and they should not represent any Political Party and none of them should seek election in any way in the forthcoming election. So it is evident that three bills for formation of Caretaker Government were deposited by Political Parties for amendment of the Constitution as early as in 1993.

The ruling party did not allow the above three bills to see the light of the day. The opposition parties gave time to amend the constitution within June 26, 1994. Since the then Government did not comply with the demand of the opposition parties within the time schedule given by them, they on, June 27, 1994 in a press conference declared the frame work of an Interim Non-party Caretaker Government and amongst other proposed for amendment of Art. 55 of

the Constitution. On July 3, the opposition came out in the street with processions for attaining a Non-party Care-Taker Government and ousting the B.N.P. Government. The political crisis was heightened. To resolve the crisis Ameca Aniaku, the Secretary-General of Common-wealth came. He could not make any head way. He is billowed by his special envoy Sir Ninean, a former Judge of Australia. Tie came on October 13, 1995 and he tried for 40 days to bring about a solution of the crisis.

Notwithstanding these facts, after the farcical Election of February 15, 1996 Khaleda Zia in her address to the nation said that on account of resignation of the members of the opposition from the Parliament necessary amendment of the constitution could not be made. But the record shows that 147 members the opposition resigned on December 1994 and their seats became vacant on July 20, 1995. She failed to hold by election in respect of the vacant seats.

She ultimately advised the President November 24, 1995 to dissolve the Parliament and it was so done. It was therefore incorrect to say that the necessary amendment to the constitution could not be made owing to the resignation of the members of the opposition from the Parliament. After holding so-called election on November 15, 1996 B.N.P. was pushed to the wall due to the mounting opposition. The people and officials of all levels of the public declared their solidarity with the demand fir Interim Non Party Caretaker Government and ouster of the B.N.P. Government. Officials from the rank of Secretaries down to the rank of peons came from the Secretariat, broke the order U/S-144 of Cr. P.C. and joined anti-government movement. Continuous ‘hartal’ became the order of the day. No transport was plying on the road. Ports were closed. Total economic activities in the country came to a halt. When the situation became very grim and unbearable the B.N.P. Government to find out a way for their exit. So in a hurry and spending a sleepless night passed the constitution (Thirteenth Amendment) Act, 1996 on the night following 25th March which was assented to by the President on March 28, 1996 and published in the Bangladesh Gazette he same day. The Controversial 6th Parliament was dissolved on March 30, 1996.

2.2. Caretaker government of Bangladesh: 2.2.1. Caretaker government of 1990: In Bangladesh the demand for neutral caretaker government largely originated from a lack of general agreement among the competing parties to maintain legitimate means of changing government and uphold unbiased election system. During the pre-independence

days, the elections of 1954 and 1970 were widely acclaimed as fair polls having significant impact on the people's movements which ultimately led to the emergence of sovereign Bangladesh in 1971.

In the face of the anti-government public outburst and mass upsurge, General Ershad had to yield to the movement. As such the framework for the formation of caretaker government advanced when the Joint Declaration was translated into reality on 6 December 1990 through the handing over state power to the nominee of the combined opposition Justice shahabuddin ahmed, the chief justice of Bangladesh. Earlier, the then Vice President Moudud Ahmed resigned and Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed was installed as the Vice President. Then General Ershad stepped down from the presidency giving his charge to the Chief Justice emerging as the country's Acting President and head of the neutral caretaker government. Subsequently, 17 Advisers of the caretaker government were appointed.

It may be mentioned that the neutral caretaker government of 1990 was constituted without any prior constitutional amendments. It was understandable that there was indeed a difficulty in convening the existing jatiya sangsad owing to shortage of time. The caretaker government of Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed, however, had the basis of support from the general people and parties and thus the legality of its activities was never questioned. All measures taken by the caretaker government were thus subsequently ratified in 1991 by the popularly elected Fifth Jatiya Sangsad.

The movement against Ershad started in 1983, gained momentum in 1987, and became severe in 1990 with the participation of all student organizations including the student wings of the two leading parties, the Awami League and the BNP. Civil society groups, particularly the professional associations, actively joined the movement for the restoration of democracy.

Ershad promulgated State of Emergency more than once to remain in power. But the scenario changed when the senior army officers withdrew their support from behind Ershad. Under the circumstances, Ershad resigned on 6 December 1990. The power was transferred to an Acting President acceptable to the combined opposition. The opposition chose Chief Justice shahabuddin ahmed as the Acting President to oversee a free and fair election. A neutral caretaker government was formed under Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed and thus for the first time a government was changed through popular uprising.

Within ninety days Shahabuddin's neutral caretaker government was able to organise a parliamentary election. This election was declared by all observers, local as well as foreign, to be the most free and fair election ever held in Bangladesh. In the election BNP won 144

seats, followed by the Awami League 88, Jatiya Party 35, and Jamaat-i-Islam 18 seats.

Besides, BAKSAL and CPB got 4 each, Workers' Party, Ganatantri Party, Islami Oikya Andolan, NDP, JSD (Siraj), and NAP (Muzaffar) 1 each and independent candidates captured 2 seats.

2.2.2 Caretaker government, 1996: In 1990 the demand for caretaker government was raised by the mainstream opposition political parties with the immediate objective of removing Ershad government from power and restoring democracy through fair polls. Thus any future necessity for such caretaker administration during elections was not considered by the Joint Declaration of the opposition. Although there was a proposal from the left parties for conducting subsequent three elections under a caretaker government, this was not supported by the two major parties, awami league and Bangladesh nationalist party (BNP).

In 1991, the restoration of parliamentary system on the basis of consensus marked a positive development. But soon disagreements on major national issues, mutual intolerance and lack of trust among the competing parties confirmed that the issue of caretaker government became the central theme of Bangladesh politics only two years after the reintroduction of parliamentary democracy. The opposition through sustained boycott of the Sangsad and frequent hartals tried to force the ruling party to accept their demand.

At the initial phase of their movement, opposition parties did not have unanimity with regard to the framework of the proposed caretaker government. This was visualised by three separate bills submitted by the jamaat-e-islami bangladesh, Awami League and jatiya party to the parliamentary secretariat in 1991, October 1993 and mid November 1993 respectively.

The essence of these bills was more or less similar, but differed on selection of the head of the caretaker government. While Awami League was in favour of appointing the Chief Justice as the head of the interim government, Jatiya Party proposed for selecting a neutral person as the head of the caretaker government, and Jamaat-e-Islami demanded for forming an advisory council headed by a neutral person to be appointed by the president. These bills, however, were not placed in the Jatiya Sangsad because of opposition boycott of the Sangsad and government's reluctance to consider the case. This made the three major opposition parties to come closer and materialise their caretaker demand through agitation and hartals.

To press the ruling party, they went to the extent of submitting en masse resignation of 147 opposition parliamentarian on 28 December 1994.

In the face of continuous agitation of the combined opposition, the Fifth Sangsad was dissolved and preparations were underway for forming the Sixth Sangsad to enact constitutional amendment for caretaker government. Having failed to convince the mainstream opposition, the ruling BNP moved unilaterally to legalise the caretaker government after the Sixth Jatiya Sangsad was constituted on 19 March 1996. Thus on 21 March 1996 the Thirteenth Amendment bill was raised in the Sangsad, and on 26 March 1996 it was passed by 268-0 vote.

With the passage of Thirteenth Amendment, Articles 58(B) (C) (D) (E) was included in the constitution which keep the following major provisions regarding caretaker government:2 (a) after the dissolution of the parliament there will be an 11-member non-party caretaker government headed by the Chief Adviser; (b) The caretaker government will be collectively responsible to the President; (c) the Chief Adviser will be appointed by the head of the state while other ten Advisers will be selected as per advice of the Chief Adviser; (d) the Chief Adviser will hold the status of prime minister while an Adviser will enjoy the status of a minister; (e) The non-party caretaker government will discharge its functions as an interim government and will carry on routine jobs, except in the case of necessity it will not make any policy decisions; (f) The caretaker government will assist the Election Commission to hold general polls impartially, fairly and peacefully; (g) This caretaker government will be dissolved on the date a new Prime Minister assumes his office.

After formalising the measures for caretaker government and in the midst of massive opposition agitation, the controversial Sixth Jatiya Sangsad was dissolved on 30 March 1996.

Subsequently a caretaker government was formed under the Thirteenth Amendment and the former Chief Justice, Justice Muhammad Habibur Rahman, took over the charge as the Chief Adviser. Four days later on 3 April 1996, ten distinguished personalities were sworn in as the Advisers of the caretaker government. The caretaker government successfully 2

The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. Page No.19

discharged its duty of holding the free and fair seventh constitutional parliamentary election on 12 June 1996, and continued in office till 23 June 1996, when the newly elected Awami League led by Sheikh Hasina formed the govrnment.

Khaleda Zia Government (1991-96) After the 1991 election, BNP under begum khaleda zia formed the government with the support of Jamaat. Both BNP and the Awami League worked together in parliament and a constitutional amendment (twelfth amendment) was passed reintroducing a parliamentary form of government.

During the Khaleda Zia government notable progress was achieved in the field of education introduction of free and compulsory primary education, free education up to class X for female students and adoption of food for education programme etc.

Prime Minister Khaleda Zia's main challenge was the task of translating into reality the promise of democratic governance. The disagreement between Awami League and BNP intensified over several municipal and parliamentary by-elections. Finally, in March 1994, the Awami League refused to accept the results of the parliamentary by-election in Magura alleging election fraud by the BNP government. The Awami League demanded resignation of the government and started a movement for a free, fair, and acceptable national election to be held under a neutral caretaker government. The Awami League boycotted parliament. In the next two years they organized a movement in support of the proposed caretaker government.

On that issue, the Jatiya Party and the Jamaat-i-Islam rendered support to the Awami League.

As a matter of fact, the country was repeatedly brought to a stand still by a series of hartals called by the Awami League. In December 1994, the opposition parties led by the Awami League resigned from parliament.

Civil society groups and the international donor community stepped in as referees to break the continuing political deadlock between the two major political parties. The international donor community, a mission sent by the Commonwealth Secretariat, Dhaka based Ambassadors, and a group of local eminent persons failed in their attempts to mediate between the Awami League and the BNP to resolve the conflict. Khaleda Zia dissolved parliament in December 1995 and the sixth parliamentary elections were held in February 1996. But the combined opposition boycotted the election.

The movement under Awami League demanding election under a caretaker government got momentum. The prolonged confrontation between the Awami League and the BNP led to a national crisis, which was resolved by BNP acceding to the caretaker government idea. The Parliament formed under 1996 election assembled in only one session in which it effected the Thirteenth Amendment to the constitution providing for caretaker government. Khaleda Zia resigned and handed over power to a caretaker government headed by former Chief Justice habibur rahman. The seventh parliamentary elections were held in 1996 and Awami League won 146 seats, followed by the BNP with 116, Jatiya Party with 32, and Jamaat-i-Islam with 3 seats. The JSD (Rab) got 1 and independent candidates got 2 seats. The Awami League candidates filled the 30 seats reserved for women.

2.2.3. Caretaker government of 2001: Following the provision for caretaker government through Thirteen Amendment of the Constitution the third caretaker government was formed on 15 July 2001 and the former Chief Justice, Justice Latifur Rahman, took over charge as the Chief Adviser. After two days, ten Advisers of the caretaker government were sworn in. The caretaker government discharged its prime duty of holding the eighth parliamentary election on 1 October 2001, and continued in office till 10 October 2001 when the new elected BNP government led by begum khaleda zia assumed state power.

The neutral caretaker governments of Bangladesh had been the products of intense opposition movement centering on the forceful demand for free and fair general polls. By legalizing caretaker government through Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution in 1996, Bangladesh has founded a unique example in the existing parliamentary systems.

Sheikh Hasina Government (1996-2001) On 23 June 1996 Awami League formed the government under the leadership of sheikh hasina. Parliament elected Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed president of Bangladesh (9 October1996). Sheikh Hasina articulated the need for national consensus and took initiative to form an all-party government. BNP refused, but two other parties, Jatiya Party and the JSD (Rab), joined the government.

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina emphasised good governance and formed several commissions. Formed with government and non-government members the commissions

reviewed several sectors including education, local government, health, autonomy to Radio and Television and civil administration to suggest reform measures. New industrial and health policies were approved. Elections to union parishads were held. The constitutional indemnity protecting the killers of Sheikh Mujib and other Awami League leaders was revoked and judicial inquiry and trials were started against the killers under the common law of the land. Hasina government signed a thirty-year Ganges water sharing treaty with India in 1996 and a peace accord relating to the Chittagong Hill Tracts in 1997. Alleging government suppression of workers of the opposition, BNP repeatedly boycotted parliamentary sessions.

The BNP also refused to participate in parliamentary by-elections.

At the end of their term the Awami League government, under the provision of the constitution, handed over power to the caretaker government in the middle of July 2001. The caretaker government headed by former Chief Justice Latifur Rahman held the election to form the 8th National Assembly. In the election held on 1 October 2001, the BNP led Four Party Alliance got 214 seats out of 300. Awami league bagged 62 seats, Jatiya Party (Ershad) 14, Krishak Sramik Janata League 1, Jatiya Party (Manju) 1, and independent candidates got 6 seats. With more than two-thirds majority in parliament the Four Party Alliance under Khaleda Zia formed the government on 10 October 2001.

The parliamentary election just completed is the third successful election carried out since the establishment of democratic system in 1991. Ten years of democracy are a tribute to the nation. This election demonstrates the resilience of the democratic approach. Elections are windows into a society. The purpose of this article is to describe one person's views about the election. I will explain what seem to me to be the main trends in the political process and what are the implications for the future of democratic politics.

This is the third election held under a caretaker government. While the first caretaker (1991) election was required since President Ershad's government was overthrown and some authority was needed to effect the transition, the 1996 and 2001 caretaker managed elections are an innovation in democratic politics. After two such elections what is one to conclude?

The concept of the caretaker government developed by former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has proved successful. Both caretaker governments executed their duties in an exemplary

fashion

and

successfully completed the election process. Bangladesh's

experience is worthy of introduction in other countries struggling to introduce democratic

systems. The caretaker government provides protection against the abuses of the government in power. These are all too common. The experience of Bangladesh can be usefully studied and its relevance for other countries assessed. The advantage of the caretaker government is that it can focus attention on the election and its management bringing fresh energy and focus. The difficulty is the danger of a national crisis emerging in midst of the caretaker government's period. This is a very unlikely danger.

The number of seats in the first past the post system shifted sharply. The following Table gives the seats for the three elections. With a majority of 214 seats the 4 party alliances has a dominating position in Parliament. Most people speak with hope that the BAL will participate in Parliament. But their position is greatly weakened by the limited number of seats. For example BAL participation in the Parliamentary committees is quite difficult as there as so few members. Joining Parliament will result in a heavy committee workload for the BAL. There are more than 30 committees so each BAL member would serve in several committees to insure fair representation. Since the heart of the Parliamentary process is the operation of the committees accommodating BAL member participation is important. Perhaps this is the time of expand government and opposition staff support for the committee. The emergence of permanent committee staff attached to the party is an important step in strengthening of democracy. This would be an excellent opportunity to initiate the practice.

Number of seats won Party/Alliance AL BNP

1991 101

146

140

JP(E)+JP(M)

18

IOJ

1 5

Total

300

214*

32

15

3 1

Other

2001 62

116

35

Jamat

* Alliance

1996

-

2 300

7 298**

** 2 seats yet to be decided The 4 party alliance strategy was to add the votes of several parties together so as to take advantage of the first past the post system. The strategy worked brilliantly. The result is reflected in the overwhelming share of seats the alliance won. The BAL found no response to this key strategic more.

Turning to the popular vote summarize the voting in the three elections. The number of voters has increased from 34 million in 1991 to 55 million in 2001. Participation in the past two elections has been at 75%. The 1991 election worked off voter list of 62 million which was probably too high; in 1996 the voter lists declined to 57 million, and in 2001 it rose to 74 million. Participation in the election was high and reflects continuing great interest by the public.

The population vote must be interpreted carefully. The 4 party alliances received 26 million against 22.3 million for the BAL, a difference of 3.7 million. However, we expect that 4.3-4.7 million votes were supporter of the two Islamic parties. In 1991 these parties received 4.4 million votes and in 1996, 4.1 million votes. Taking 4.5 million as a reasonable figure for 2001 for the two Islamic parties the BNP has the support of 21.5 million Vs 22.3 million for the BAL. The BAL probably has more support in the popular vote than the BNP has. This was also seen in the two previous elections.

Another characteristic is the convergence of the vote on the two major parties. In the 1991 election the two main contenders (the BAL alliance and the BNP) received 63.3% of the vote.

In 1996 this increased to 71.1% and in 2001 the 4 party alliance and the BAL obtained 87.1% (excluding the two Islamic parties estimated votes, it comes to 79.0%). The voters are increasingly focused on the two major parties. This is an important factor in Bangladesh independents will have less and less chance of being elected. The most dramatic examples are the Jamat and IOJ that have strengthened their position only under the umbrella of the alliance and the Jatiya Party, which has lost much of its support. If these trends continue the next election should see 90-95% of the votes going to the two main grouping. This is good for political stability. A Parliament with several parties will be unstable in Bangladesh conditions. The first two elected Parliaments since 1991 were stabilized by the 30 woman seats; the third by the strong showing of the alliance.

First the voter lists. There was considerable uproar about voter lists. Scanning the lists revealed there were 4.3% duplicates. On a probability model constructed using this data about 2.5% of duplicates was legitimate. Hence there is suspicion of 1.8% of the votes. There was a wide range of duplication rates, up to 15% in some areas. In areas with such high duplication rates there was potential for abuse. It is unlikely that voter list manipulation made any difference in most constituencies. More important it suggests that this is an area where the Election Commission has done fairly will but can do better. Interestingly there were far more female than male duplicates.3 Claims were made that the Hindu vote was less than it should have been. There is no clear evidence of this. However, to the extent this happened it took place in rural areas. Urban areas are much more difficult to influence. The participation rates are such that it is unlikely that there was widespread repression. At least it was not worse than in the 1996 election.

The most illusive impeachment of the election comes from the lists of "terrorists" or trouble makers" supplied to the army and police by the caretaker government. Some claim these were biased against the BAL and the lists contained important BAL election staff. Detention of these people made it very difficult for some BAL candidates to carry out their duties. Others claim that these lists were indeed the troublemakers and the fact these are mostly BAL simply reflected the real situation. This conflict in views cannot be resolved.

The extent of the alliance victory is not easily grasped by the number so far. The followingTable reports the margin of victory (%). This is calculated for various margins for the 1996 and the 2001 election. For the 2001 election the winners by party are also shown. In 1996 the election was very close. More than half of the seats had margins less than 10%. In 2001 only 45 seats had such small margins and of these 19 were won by the alliance. A 10% improvement in the vote would have won only 19 more seats for the BAL. The alliance had 150 seats won by margins of 15% or more. All parties together had only 83 seats won by such larger margins in 1996.

2.2.4 Caretaker Government-2006:

3

Ibid

The national election of Bangladesh was held on 29 December 2008 under the Caretaker government formed with Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed as the Chief Adviser on 13 January 2007. This was the third Caretaker government formed after the tenure of the government of Prime Minister Khaleda Zia ended in October 2006. The Caretaker government of Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed functioned without legislative authority as it continued to function after its scheduled tenure of 120 days ended on 12 May 2007. All decisions taken after this date must be ratified by the parliament for the sake of legitimacy.

The Caretaker government of Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed was a military controlled and has made extensive use of the military to stymie the chaos that proceeded the 11th of January, 2007.

From the very outset however, the government made it clear that they were there not only arrange a free and fair election, but also to make sure that all aspects that are connected to it are reviewed properly. This meant major reforms in the election system, but also making sure that corrupt candidates could not take part in the election. The task was however an enormous one, since Bangladesh is regarded as one of the most corrupt nations in the world. Therefore, the government had exceeded its mandated term, which according to the constitution allows it to stay only for 90 days.

In defiance of the Constitutional provision the Caretaker government of Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed postponed the national election 29 December 2008.

It’s official now. After much suspense over the last 24 hours, President Iajuddin Ahmed was sworn in as the chief adviser of the caretaker government today. In a nationally televised ceremony, Iajuddin Ahmed was sworn in by Chief Justice JR Mudassir Hossain. Though the ceremony was attended by senior diplomats, civil servants and all major politicians, main opposition Awami League (AL) was not present. Later on chief of AL, Hasina enlightened that she didn’t received the invitation letter until only five minutes before the function.

Without fully rejecting the new caretaker government chief, Hasina further said "Whether we will accept him now depends on what measures he takes in the future”. It is very unfortunate that the leaders of the two main parties could not reach an agreement on a mutually accepted neutral candidate for this job. Time will tell what lies ahead in the next 90 days; constitution calls for an election within that 90-day period.

In fact, it was the newly elected Secretary-General of the United Nations Mr. Ban Ki-moon threatened the then Caretaker Government (CG) headed by Dr. Iajuddin Ahmed to take punitive actions if the constitutionally mandated elections within 90-days from the dissolution of the last parliament were not stopped, as per the bogey of faulty electoral roll claimed by Awami League, president Sheikh Hasina. It was a naked interference of the UN in any country’s internal and democratic process. Think Mr. Ban Ki-moon was hoodwinked by the shrewd AL leadership in this particular case.

2.2.4.1. KM Hasan steps aside for the sake of people: Former Chief Justice KM Hasan yesterday said he decided to stay away from performing his constitutionally mandated responsibility as chief adviser to the caretaker government in the interest of the people. He also urged the political parties to put aside their differences and cooperate towards holding a peaceful election, which reflects the will of the people.

In a press release distributed to the journalists by an advocate in front of his residence at Dhanmondi yesterday evening, Justice Hasan said it is very sad and reflects the will of the people.

In a press release distributed to the journalists by an advocate in front of his residence at Dhanmondi yesterday evening, Justice Hasan said it is very sad and unfortunate that the situation has come to this when the political parties cannot resolve their differences through dialogue.

The release did not mention anything about his 'sickness' while Bangabhaban had earlier claimed that Justice KM Hasan was sick. The police officials deployed at his residence also told the journalists that the justice was sick, but could not say the nature of sickness. No doctor visited his house during the whole day.

"The people of this country deserve better prepared to serve in national interest but the level of mistrust between the political parties has made position untenable," the press release said.

The former chief justice said he, along with the whole nation, was looking forward to a positive outcome of the dialogue between the two major political parties, but the dialogue collapsed making it obligatory for him to come to this decision.� It is best should stand aside

rather than be a hurdle to the political process. Making this gesture to bring in a peaceful atmosphere for the people of Bangladesh and to show my solidarity with them."

2.2.4.2. Election Date Announced: The news is not out yet in the major media and the internet but just caught the news on TV (Channel i) very early this morning that Bangladesh election date was abruptly announced today. AL and 14-party have been very rigid from the start on accepting any election date unless and until their demands are met. After the M.A. Aziz issue, two main ones that are still outstanding are the reconstitution of the EC and the resolution on the voter list. BNP and the 4-party alliance has been delivering their daily push for the election schedule and now they have it but now we will have to wait and see what the reaction is from the 14-party though think it will be rejected flat-out.

2.2.4.3. Election Boycott: Whatever glimmer of hope that year 2006 ended with is now all but faded as AL and the mega alliance decided to boycott the 2007 general election scheduled to be held on January 22. Demands for removal of chief adviser Iajuddin Ahmed strengthen along with demand for properly completing the voter list. Now that Ershad has been barred to take part in the election, a new demand to reinstate Ershad as a contestant makes it to the list of demands now.

BNP and their 4 party alliance on the other hand wants to election date firm on January 22 even if that means the election will not be an all-party election. It is a tough situation as superficially it may seem that BNP is firm on upholding the constitution that mandates election within 90 days of caretaker takeover and AL and mega alliance is attempting to demean the constitution by pushing the election beyond the 90 day period. Not a lawmaker but think essence of the constitution on election matters is bound to require a free and fair election which the opposition feels isn’t possible without meeting their demands.

Dr Fakhruddin Ahmed was born in Munshiganj. Obtained the first position in his class (first class first) in both BA (Hons) and MA from the Department of Economics in Dhaka University in 1960 and 1961. He received another master's degree in Development Economics from Williams College, USA and the Doctorate Degree in Economics from Princeton University. He started his career as a lecturer of Economics in Dhaka University.

Later, he joined the civil service of Pakistan. Served the government until 1978 when he

joined the World Bank where he served until 2001. He joined as the governor of Bangladesh Bank in 2001 and his contract expired on April 30, 2005.

2.2.4.4. State of Emergency: President and Chief Adviser Iajuddin declared State of Emergency and nighttime curfew across the country today and relieving all controversy, decided to step down from the Chief Adviser role. With escalating violence and disagreement between the two main parties in the last few weeks, the country was divided and came to a deadlock. Just humble opinion but the State of Emergency may not be a bad thing considering our current state with no glimpse of hope. This may prove to be the best thing Iajuddin has done so far along with his decision to step down which was one of the major demands of the opposition parties. The election can now be delayed beyond the 90-day period which was not permissible under the constitution.

Differences of opinion are floating around all over the “blog world” about if the State of Emergency is a good thing or a bad thing. Of course, it is not desirable to see any nation in a State of Emergency unless something-worst possible happens. Haven’t we reached that stage with leaders going in opposite direction, international backing of the election fading, economy taking substantial hit with continuing oborodh (blockade), hartals (strikes) and complete breakdown of law and order? Not sure if there were any other way to bring things under control considering the election was scheduled to be held in 11 days with so many unresolved issues. Consider the following situations: 1) If election were to be held on January 22, it was not going to an all-party election. The international community has already made it clear that such election was not going to acceptable plus it can be left to our guess how violent the post election situation would be.

2) If the election was to be delayed beyond January 22 without the State of Emergency, that would “breach the constitution”. With one group arguing that it won’t breach the constitution while the others saying absolutely yes. Decision, such as this one, taken in a controversy is bound to fail or cause further trouble.

Caretaker Government in Pakistan:

Article 48(5) of the Pakistan Constitution specifically provides for ‘caretaker government’. It stipulates that-Where the President dissolves the National Assembly; he shall in his discretion. a) Appoint a date not later 90 days from the date of the dissolution, for holding of a general election to the Assembly; b) Appoint a ‘Caretaker Government’.

In Pakistan there is no provision for appointing a non-party caretaker government; neither any mandatory provision that the caretaker government will not take part in election.

2.3. Change of government: When an opposition party or coalition wins enough seats at a general election to be able to command a majority in the House of Representatives, the incumbent Prime Minister formally advises the Governor-General that he should invite the Leader of the Opposition to form a government. The Governor-General then requests the incumbent Prime Minister and his or her Ministers to remain in government in caretaker capacity until a new government is sworn in. The Governor-General then contacts the Leader of the Opposition and invites him to form a government. The Leader of the Opposition accepts the invitation, and undertakes to inform the Governor-General when the new Ministry is in a position to be sworn in. This can be delayed by the counting of votes in closely contested seats, or by the processes by which ministers are chosen under the relevant party's rules. In the meantime, the caretaker government continues in office.

2.4. The 1901 caretaker government: The first Australian federal government, headed by Prime Minister Edmund Barton, was sworn in on 1 January 1901, the day on which the Federation of Australia took effect, whereby the six colonies of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania became States of the Commonwealth of Australia. The first election for the new Parliament of Australia was not held until 29 and 30 March 1901. In the meantime, Barton's government operated in a caretaker capacity but, due to need to quickly establish administrative processes and make important appointments, they were not as inhibited by the caretaker conventions as later governments were.

2.5. Similarities and Dissimilarities of the Caretaker Government in Different Countries:

The international academic literature on caretaker government is exceptionally thin.

Indeed, many standard texts on the constitutional practices and procedures of particular democratic states either do not mention, or only fleetingly discuss, the nature and frequency of caretaker periods and the proper role of, and constraints upon, caretaker governments.

Likewise, even the political science literature on government formation and termination – which is extensive gives surprisingly little attention to the nature and implications of caretaker government.

Despite the relative dearth of material, it appears that most parliamentary democracies have developed explicit conventions to guide the actions of caretaker governments. Typically, such conventions require, amongst other things, that incumbent governments should remain in office until a new administration is sworn in. While caretaker governments are generally deemed to have full executive powers, it is expected that they should not embark upon major new policy initiatives. In effect this means that significant policy matters not requiring immediate decisions should be left for the new government to deal with. Exceptions to such rules normally arise only when the caretaker period is protracted.

Of course, determining what it means to preserve the "policy status quo" under a caretaker government is not always clear cut. The dominant view in the literature is that there should be no change from the policy position "that was in place when the outgoing government lost its parliamentary basis". Presumably this means that a policy which has already been announced but not fully implemented should proceed. But this policy may have been the subject of significant political controversy – indeed, it may have sparked the fall of the government – and there may, accordingly, be strong pressures on a caretaker government to delay, or alter the process of, policy implementation. Another implication of preserving the policy status quo is that a caretaker government cannot respond to new situations and issues in the manner in which it might have done had there been no question over its parliamentary position. In this sense, therefore, "the caretaker government represents less than the policy position of the outgoing government".

While periods of caretaker government occur in all parliamentary democracies, they tend to be both more frequent and more protracted in countries with proportional representation. This is because election outcomes are less clear cut with the result that government formation is more complex and time consuming. Governmental durability also tends to be lower in

countries with proportional representation than those with first-past-the post electoral systems. For such reasons, countries with proportional representation have a greater need for clear caretaker conventions.

It may be useful at this juncture to outline briefly the nature and application of caretaker conventions in a range of parliamentary democracies: first, Australia and Canada (which like New Zealand have been influenced strongly by the Westminster tradition); and second, a number of countries with systems of proportional representation.

In Australia the caretaker conventions operate from the time Parliament is dissolved until either a new government is sworn in or the election results confirm that the existing administration will remain in office. Wherever possible, incumbent governments are expected to avoid issues of significance, such as taking major policy decisions which are likely to commit the next government, making important appointments and entering into major contracts. Very similar conventions apply in Canada. On the one hand, an incumbent administration in Canada "retains its full legal authority to carry on the government of the country and remains fully responsible for ensuring the provision of effective government, until a new government is sworn in". On the other hand, such a government is expected to show restraint. The precise nature of this restraint is, of course, a matter of political judgement. Where the incumbent government has been clearly defeated in the House or in an election, the expectation of restraint is all the stronger. In these cases, only "urgent, routine, non-controversial and 'reversible' decisions would be considered appropriate".

Turning to countries with proportional representation: in Norway there is a fixed parliamentary term and general elections are held every four years in mid-September.

Following the election the incumbent government is required to continue in office until a new administration has been formed. Moreover, even if the government has been defeated at the election or for other reasons wishes to resign, it is required to present the annual Budget in early October before the new administration is sworn in. Thus, a post-election caretaker period can typically last about a month. While the Norwegian constitution "does not recognize any particular rules or constraints concerning caretaker governments", conventions nevertheless dictate that it should refrain from taking significant decisions.

In Sweden, while the only constitutional difference between ordinary and caretaker governments is that the latter cannot dissolve Parliament; in practice caretaker governments constrain their actions to administrative matters and avoid presenting bills to Parliament.

However, Larsson suggests that if an incumbent government were required to remain in office for a number of months (instead of the usual two-to-three weeks) it would operate "more and more like an ordinary cabinet". This, in fact, appears to be the case in the Netherlands, where it is not unknown for the process of government formation to take six months, or even longer. Not surprisingly, in such circumstances, Dutch caretaker administrations are obliged to govern in a relatively "normal" fashion. Thus, the legislative process continues, with new legislation being drafted and presented to Parliament: "budgets are introduced, subsidies are handed out and appointments are made". Important political decisions are, of course, only made after detailed inter-party consultations.

Of the countries with proportional representation for which information could be obtained, only Germany and Ireland appear to have no statutory provisions or well-established conventions imposing a limitation on the behaviour of caretaker governments. In the case of Germany, the potential difficulties generated by caretaker periods are fewer than in many other jurisdictions because changes of government between elections require a "constructive vote of no-confidence". Accordingly, no government can lose the confidence of the legislature between elections without this confidence being simultaneously transferred to an alternative government. Thus, although an outgoing government acts in a caretaker capacity while a new government is being formed, there will be no doubt over the nature of this new government. Inter-party consultations on any important policy matters which might arise during this period can thereby be conducted in a relatively certain political context. For various reasons, however, most elections during the post-war era have produced clear-cut outcomes in the sense that the likely composition of the new government has been evident as soon as the results of the election have been determined. Consequently, caretaker periods have not generated major political difficulties.

In Ireland, while "acting" or caretaker governments are specifically referred to in Article 28.11.1 of the country's Constitution, there is no constitutional limitation on the powers of such governments. Perhaps partly for this reason, as Laver notes, "Irish caretaker Governments has not shrunk from using the full powers available to them with little regard to their caretaker status". This has included making various appointments to statutory boards for reasons that can only be regarded as political. In order to prevent such behaviour, Laver has suggested that reland should follow Germany in introducing a constructive vote of noconfidence and that the Constitution should be amended so that caretaker administrations are

limited to making decisions which are "required to ensure the essential good government of the State".

CHAPTER-THREE Constitutional Aspects of the Caretaker Government 3.1. In the Sense of the Caretaker Government: In true sense the term ‘Caretaker Government’ means an interim government which is a non-party government and abstains itself from contesting the election and is appointed particularly for conducting the election. For example, the provision for ‘caretaker government’ as provided by the 13th Amendment of the Constitution of Bangladesh ensures a caretaker government in true sense, for none of the government has the right to contest general election. Caretaker government of Pakistan of 1993 and 1997 were caretaker government in proper sense. The interim government to conduct election in South Africa in 1994 was also a caretaker government in true sense. The interim government of Justice Sahabuddin Ahmed which was formed after the fall of military director Ershad regime in 1990 in Bangladesh was not, form constitutional point of view, any caretaker government because there was no provision for caretaker government as such in the Constitution of Bangladesh. Under the provisions as the Vice-President and when Ershad resigned Sahabuddin Ahmed acted as the Acting President and until he came out of his office he acted as the Acting President. But if we examine his government from factual, political and philosophical point view, we find that his government was essentially through not constitutionally a caretaker government in true sense. Because all of his governments were non-political persons and none of them took part in the election.

In March 1994, controversy over a parliamentary by-election, which the opposition claimed the government had rigged, led to an indefinite boycott of Parliament by the entire opposition. The opposition also began a program of repeated general strikes to press its demand that Khaleda Zia's government resign and a caretaker government supervise a general election. Efforts to mediate the dispute, under the auspices of the Commonwealth Secretariat, failed. After another attempt at a negotiated settlement failed narrowly in late December 1994, the opposition resigned en masse from Parliament. The opposition then continued a campaign of marches, demonstrations, and strikes in an effort to force the government to resign. The opposition, including the Awami League's Sheikh Hasina, pledged to boycott national elections scheduled for February 15, 1996.

In February, Khaleda Zia was re-elected by a landslide in voting boycotted and denounced as unfair by the three main opposition parties. In March 1996, following escalating political turmoil, the sitting Parliament enacted a constitutional amendment to allow a neutral caretaker government to assume power conduct new parliamentary elections; former Chief Justice Mohammed Habibur Rahman was named Chief Advisor (a position equivalent to prime minister) in the interim government. New parliamentary elections were held in June 1996 and were won by the Awami League; party leader Sheikh Hasina became Prime Minister.

3.2. Background of the 13th Amendment: On the way to restoration of liberal democracy from the bondage of military autocracy the historic 5th Parliamentary Election was a milestone which was held under the Acting President Justice Sahabuddin Ahmed in 1991. An unprecedented degree of venthusiasm was shown by all quarters. The election was nationally and internationally recognized as free and fair. Winning majority seats, in parliament the BNP formed government. But form the beginning of the BNP government the opposition parties in the Parliament began to create pressure to the government so that it include provision for caretaker government in the Constitution. In 1993 first Jamat-i-Islam and the AL and JP submitted their respective Bills concerning caretaker government. Every Bill contained the same object –“to make a general elections free and fair and to make the whole process of election free from the government influence provision for caretaker government should be introduced in the constitution.” But this demand of the opposition parties was treated by the government as unconstitutional and illegal. The Magura by election was turning point for movement of caretaker government. It was this Magura by election in which the government party BNP took resort to an unprecedented malpractice and rigging.

3.3. Formation of the Caretaker Government: 13th Amendment of the Constitution of the People Republic of Bangladesh is the source of the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh. This Amendment was passed with 268-0 votes on 26th

March,

1996 and law on 28th March. The Amendment added a new Chapter

(Chapter-IIA: Non-Party Caretaker Government) in part of the constitution with 5 new Article (58A, 58B, 58C, 58D and 58E). It also amendment Article 61, 99, 123, 147, 152 and the Third Schedule of the Constitution.

∗∗ Non-Party Care-taker Government: Article-58B. Non-Party Care-taker Government (1) There shall be a Non-Party Care-taker Government during the period from the date on which the Chief Adviser of such government enters upon office after Parliament is dissolved or stands dissolved by reason of expiration of its term till the date on which a new Prime Minister enters upon his office after the constitution of Parliament.

(2) The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall be collectively responsible to the President.

(3) The executive power of the Republic shall, during the period mentioned in clause (1), be exercised, subject to the provisions of article 58D(1), in accordance with this Constitution, by or on the authority of the Chief Adviser and shall be exercised by him in accordance with the advice of the Non-Party Care-taker Government.

(4) The provisions of article 55(4), (5) and (6) shall (with the necessary adaptations) apply to similar matters during the period mentioned in clause (1). ∗∗ Composition of the Non-Party Caretaker Government: Article-58C. Composition of the Non-Party Caretaker Government, appointment of Advisers, etc.

(1) Non-Party Care-taker Government shall consist of the Chief Adviser at its head and not more than ten other Advisors, all of whom shall be appointed by the President.

(2) The Chief Adviser and other Advisers shall be appointed within fifteen days after Parliament is dissolved or stands dissolved, and during the period between the date on which Parliament is dissolved or stands dissolved and the date on which the Chief Adviser is appointed, the Prime Minister and his cabinet who were in office immediately before Parliament was dissolved or stood dissolved shall continue to hold office as such.

(3) The President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person who among the retired Chief Justices of Bangladesh retired last and who is qualified to be appointed as an Adviser under this article: Provided that if such retired Chief Justice is not available or is not willing to hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person who

among the retired Chief Justices of Bangladesh retired next before the last retired Chief Justice.

(4) If no retired Chief Justice is available or willing to hold the office of Chief Advise, the President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person who among the retired Judges of the Appellate Division retired last and who is qualified to be appointed as an Adviser under this article: Provided that if such retired Judge is not available or is not willing to hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person who among the retired Judges of the Appellate Division retired next before the last such retired Judge.

(5) If no retired judge of the Appellate Division is available or willing to hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall, after consultation, as far as practicable, with the major political parties, appoint the Chief Adviser from among citizens of Bangladesh who are qualified to be appointed as Advisers under this article.

(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, if the provisions of clauses (3), (4) and (5) cannot be given effect to, the President shall assume the functions of the Chief Adviser of the Non-Party Care-taker Government in addition to his own functions under this Constitution.

(7) The President shall appoint Advisers from among the persons who are-4 1. qualified for election as members of parliament; 2. Not members of any political party or of any organization associated with or affiliated to any political party; 3. Not, and have agreed in writing not to be, candidates for the ensuing election of members of parliament; 4. Not over seventy-two years of age.

(8) The Advisers shall be appointed by the President on the advice of the Chief Adviser.

(9) The Chief Adviser or an Adviser may resign his office by writing under his hand addressed to the President.

(10) The Chief Adviser or an Adviser shall cease to be Chief Adviser or Adviser if he is disqualified to be appointed as such under this article.

4

Ibid

(11) The Chief Adviser shall have the status, and shall be entitled to the remuneration and privileges, of a Prime Minister and an Adviser shall have the status, and shall be entitled to the remuneration and privileges, of a Minister.

(12) The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall stand dissolved on the date on which the prime Minister enters upon his office after the constitution of new parliament.

3.4. Functions of Non-Party Caretaker Government: The idea of care-taker government is that during the period parliamentary election is held, the affairs of the government should be run by neutral persons so that no political party can utilize the governmental machinery and resources, monetary or otherwise, to influence the parliamentary election. The care-taker government is to hold the balance between the political parties and ensure that the Election Commission is able to hold a free and fair parliamentary election. The care-taker government is not supposed to take any policy decision which will have to be taken by the elected representatives of the peoples Hence avt.58D provides that the care-taker government shall function as an interim government and shall discharge the routine functions; it shall not take any policy decision unless it becomes necessary to take it for the purpose of carrying out the routine functions. The Amendment has not made it clear which functions can be said to be routine functions. The term 'routine function' has to be interpreted and its expanse determined having regard to the fact that the care-taker government is an interim government and consists of non-elected persons. The embargo on taking policy decision is not absolute and policy decision may be taken in respect of a routine function if it becomes necessary for the performance of such function: Before the dissolution of the Seventh Parliament, the Appellate Division gave certain directions in Secretary, Ministry of Finance v. Masdar Hossain5 relating to recruitment, control and supervision of the members of the subordinate judiciail and the magistrates exercising judicial functions and fixed the time limit for compliance. Compliance of the directions of the Appellate Division necessitated taking a policy decision and the care-taker government took the policy decision. However, the principal objective of the care-taker government is to assist the Election Commission in holding a free and fair election and even though art. 126 stipulates the duty of all executive authorities to assist the Election Commission in the discharge of its functions, to emphasize this role of the care-taker government, art.58D (2) specifically provides, "The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall 5

2000 BLD (AD) 104

vive to the Election Commission all possible aid and assistance that may be required for holding election of members of Parliament peacefully, fairly and impartially." Thus the caretaker government is required to take all measures to assist the Election Commission in holding free, fair and peaceful election and in taking such measures the care-taker government does not have the limitation relating to policy decision provided in art.58D (l).

The provision of art.58D (2) is not in any way controlled by the provision of art.58D. Article-58D. Functions of Non-Party Care-taker Government (1) The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall discharge its functions as an interim government and shall carry on the routine functions of such government with the aid and assistance of persons in the services of the Republic; and, except in the case of necessity for the discharge of such functions its shall not make any policy decision.

(2) The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall give to the Election Commission all possible aid and assistance that may be required for bolding the general election of members of parliament peacefully, fairly and impartially.

Article-58E. Certain provisions of the Constitution to remain ineffective Notwithstanding anything contained in articles 48(3), 141A(1) and 141C(1) of the Constitution, during the period the Non-Party Care-taker government is functioning, provisions in the constitution requiring the President to act on the advice of the Prime Minister or upon his prior counter-signature shall be ineffective.

3.5. Qualification of the Advisers: 1. qualified for election as members of parliament; 2. Not members of any political party or of any organisation associated with or affiliated to any political party; 3. Not, and have agreed in writing not to be, candidates for the ensuing election of members of parliament; 4. Not over seventy-two years of age.

3.6. Qualification of the Chief Adviser: (i)

The person who among the retired Chief Justices of Bangladesh retired last.

(ii)

If such retired Chief Justice is not available or is not willing to hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person who among

the retired Chief Justices of Bangladesh retired next before the last retired Chief Justice. (iii)

If no retired Chief Justice is available or willing to hold the office of Chief Advise, the President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person who among the retired Judges of the Appellate Division retired last if such retired Judge is not available or is not willing to hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person who among the retired Judges of the Appellate Division retired next before the last such retired Judge.

(iv)

If such retired Judge is not available or is not willing to hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person who among the retired Judges of the Appellate Division retired next before the last such retired Judge.

(v)

If no retired judge of the Appellate Division is available or willing to hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall, after consultation, as far as practicable, with the major political parties, appoint the Chief Adviser from among citizens of Bangladesh.

(vi)

If none of the above persons can be found to be appointed as the Chief Adviser, the President shall assume the functions of the Chief Adviser.

3.7. Transfer of the members of the services of the Republic: Transfer of the members of the services of the Republic is routine function of the government performed in the public interest and on consideration of administrative exigencies. The government pursues certain policies and issues instructions in this regard.

The care taker government cannot change the policy and the instructions unless such change is necessary for the performance of the routine functions or to assist the Election Commission to hold a free and fair parliamentary election. The care-taker government constituted on dissolution of tin-Seventh Parliament undertook a policy of large scale transfer of the civil servants including those who were not in any way involved in t In-parliamentary election process. It was contended that the care later government transgressed its constitutional limit.

No straight answer can be given in this regard without going into the nature of the transfers ordered and without coming to a conclusion as to whether the public interest and administrative exigency or holding of free and fair-election necessitated such large scale transfers, but, at the same time, tin-criticism against the care-taker government in this regard cannot readily be dismissed as untenable.

3.8. Ordinance Making Power of the President:

In a writ petition filed before the High Court Division, the petitioner con tended that art. 124 provided that subject to the provisions of the Constitution, Parliament may by law make provisions as to elections, the power under art.93 does not extend to making any provision regarding parliamentary election. Furthermore, though art.93 authorizes the President to promulgate an Ordinance, the President exercises the power on the advice of the Prime Minister, an civilized representative of the people and he cannot exercise the power when there is no Prime Minister to advise him. The contention is unable inasmuch as art.93 not only stipulates under what circumstances the President can promulgate an Ordinance.

T5he Parliament is dissolved and the President is satisfied that it is necessary, he can make and promulgate an Ordinance and that an Ordinance shall have the like force of law as an AI.I of Parliament. Thus the power of the President to make law by an Ordinance is coextensive with the power of Parliament in making law as otherwise provided in the Proviso to art.93. Secondly, Parliament being conscious about the advice of the Prime Minister required for of making an Ordinance, specifically provided in ait.58E 111: i during the period the caretaker government functions, institution requiring the President to act on the advice of the Prime Minister shall be ineffective. Though promulgation of an Ordinance involves taking of a policy decision, the limitation, in view of the provision of art.58D (2), cannot apply in case of promulgation of an Ordinance to ensure free and fair election.

3.9. Responsibility of the President: Caretaker government, constituted with persons not elected by the responsibility of the care-taker government is not affected by the provision of art.58B (3) that the executive power of the Republic during this interregnum period shall be exercised by and on the authority of the Chief Adviser and shall be exercised by the Chief Adviser in accordance with the advice of the care-taker government. On the other hand. It may also be argued that the Constitution contemplates a parliamentary term of government in which the President is a titular head and a presidential form of government during the interregnum period is not contemplated. The Chief Adviser and the Advisers have been respectively given the status of Prime Minister and Ministers and thus the Chief Adviser shall be in the position of the Prime Minister in performance of the governmental functions and the care-taker government has been made responsible to the President in the sense that the President may ask for information about their activities. Art.58E provides that while the caretaker government is functioning, the provisions of arts.48 (3), 141A (1) and 141C (1) requiring the President to act on the advice of the Prime Minister shall remain ineffective. It does not, however, say that the President shall have to act on the advice of the Chief Adviser during this period. The view

that the care-taker government is accountable to the President seems to be weightier, but an authoritative interpretation in this regard is necessary.

The Thirteenth Amendment has modified the provision of art.61 by adding the expression 'and such law, during the period in which there is a Non-Party Care-Taker Government under art.58B, be administered by the President at the end of that article. Article 61 deals with military service. The provision of art.58B (3) to the effect that all executive authority of the Republic shall be exercised by the Care-taker government is a general provision, while art.61 is a special provision relating to the military service. If it was intended that art.58B (3) would be applicable in respect of the military service, the amendment of art.61 was unnecessary.

Hence, it has to be taken that the administration of the laws relating to the military service has been taken out of the purview of art.58B (3) and has been placed in the hands of the President.

3.10. In Defense of the Constitution: Description Bangladesh is in a very serious Constitutional crisis; full of political chaos, confusion and conflicts; which led to violence and killings; halting economic activities and seriously hampering the civil administration; causing ever-ending sufferings to the people; virtually, the country is in battle of power since the departure of the last government on 27th October, 2006.

The battle of power is purely political, not based on any political philosophy; not to combat but to sustain corruption; not to establish democratic practice but to gain power for personal and party benefits; not to defend but to abuse the constitution. The Third Eye, the people at large, especially the middle class educated ones, is now jimmy in the hands of power and politicians.

The Third Eye hardly had the opportunity to assess the political crises to marry with the constitutional provisions, to give positive prescription to the nation and its people, for the best possible understanding of the adverse changes taking place, to challenge them with wisdom to turn the changes into opportunities rather than threats to avoid any further chaos and conflict.

Precisely, that is what happened in our country during the last few weeks. The world has witnessed killings in tens and injured in hundreds during the street battles between the political parties. An uncertainty is now obvious in resolving the political conflicts and holding forthcoming general election in the country on time.

The persons in positions in the caretaker government and in administration are in question; the Commissioners of the Election Commission, in particular, the Chief Election Commissioner is in the centre point of the national dispute; the voter list is not yet updated; the lawyers interpreting the constitutional provisions to favour to their own parties; Generals in the cantonment are now out in the street and also in readiness for call to maintain peace and help running the caretaker government and to hold a peaceful election; and the international founders and donors kept pressing the caretaker government and the election commission to hold a free and fair election for an effective parliament. This is, in brief, the crisis of the country today.

As a law practitioner and in the eye of law generally, I felt the core issue in dispute is in the Constitution itself. As I said recently in a keynote speech under the title ‘Road Map for Effective Parliament’ that ‘Constitution is the will of the people’, but its supremacy is in question today. The people from all over the country helplessly witnessed shameless amendments made to the constitution for personal and political party interest. It has been amended and repealed, again and again, with black laws, bad laws and laws with hardly any effectiveness. Concentrate here only on the provisions that are currently in ever-ending discussion among the politicians, intelligentsias and the party lawyers, they are: Article 70: ‘A member of parliament elected with nomination from a political party shall vacate his seat if he resigns from that party or votes in the parliament against that party’. It goes further, ‘if even a Member of Parliament is absent or abstains from voting, it will be counted as if he has voted against his own party’. This is highly prejudicial and subject to right to fundamental freedom, as to be a true representative of the people rather than his own party. Although the article may be argued for and against in individual circumstances, the general consensus is against the substitution of the article, hence it should have been withdrawn long back to safeguard the democratic process rather than favouring evil power grabbing engineering.

Articles 67: ‘A Member of Parliament shall vacate his seat if he is absent from the Parliament without the leave of Parliament, for ninety consecutive sitting days’. During the last three tenures, it has been observed that the parties in opposition abused the holy purpose of this provision and kept themselves absent from attending the parliamentary sessions for their personal and party benefits. After all, they have enjoyed all the financial benefits, facilities and privileges but stayed out of Parliamentary functions. There must be a remedy to this

constant problem of absenteeism. Should the minority Parliamentarians face any undemocratic treatment from the Speaker or the ruling party members, they must sort out the problems within the premises of the Parliament not by coming out in the street to cause sufferings to the general members of the public. The whole purpose of the Parliament is to resolve the national disputes and differences between the parties in position and parties in opposition through democratic participation within the Parliament, in addition to law making functions.

Article 75: The nation has also observed that the Parliaments during the last three tenures failed quite often to hold at all or on time its regular sessions for the shortage of members present. The article says ‘if at any time during which Parliament is in session the attention of the person presiding is drawn to the fact that the number of members present is less than sixty, he shall either suspend the meeting until at least sixty members are present, or adjourn it’. The fact is our Members of the Parliaments, we elected knowingly or unknowingly that they were mostly part-timers in Parliament and full-timers in personal business; we have by now established the fact that most of them are in Parliamentary business, invested crores and earned unprecedented dividend in return, but nothing much for the people, resulting today the people face a national political turmoil. The voters, hopefully, learned their lessons, and will make sure they elect full-time, committed and patriotic parliamentarians.

Article 58C: It was extremely alarming to note that the pro-BNP lawyers demanded arrest of pro-Awami League lawyers alleging that they (AL) have been misinterpreting the Constitution of the country using the banner of Supreme Court Bar Association. The fact is, during the crisis of formation of the Caretaker Government, both the major political party lawyers gave interpretations of the Article 58C to favor their own parties. This statement may not be acceptable to either of the parties, preciously; this is why the battle of power has now come out of the palaces to the streets.

The general members of the public will agree and

appreciate the very truth.

Here there was no direct confusion between the major political parties. The confusion that led to conflict lays in Article 58C (4), where the sentence started with ‘if no retired Chief Justice is available this is where the core concentration was given by both the major party-lawyers.

The pro-Awami League lawyers interpreted reading the sentence like ‘if no ‘other’ retired Chief Justice is available on the other hand the pro-BNP lawyers interpreted this provision as ‘if no ‘such’ retired Chief Justice is available. Effectively, none was taken into or given due

consideration when the Honble President took over the position of the Chief Advisor of the Caretaker Government. Complaints were visibly seen in the print and electronic media that the Article 58C(5) was either ignored or not given due consideration before taking over the position of the Chief Advisor by the Humble President, not to mention the other provisions available under Article 58C. This decision clearly made the people confused which ultimately created a definite conflict for an unforeseen future.

Article 118: The Chief Election Commissioner Justice M A Aziz was appointed by the President under this article. There are allegations against Justice M A Aziz as a partisan and also he has a contempt case against him with the Supreme Court of Bangladesh in course of his official duties as the Chief Election Commissioner. He holds this constitutional position for a period of five years under Article 118(3), from the date on which he enters upon his office. Although, because of the above allegations against him, the 14 party alliances led by Awami League wants his removal in no time, such removal is not so simple. He cannot be fired, unless he resigns himself from the position under Article 118(6) or the President do so ‘by order’ or is removed on any ground applicable to the Judges of the Supreme Court under Article 118(5). Again, the whole nation is in crisis over the removal dispute of the Chief Election Commissioner as demanded by the 14 party alliances. A special four member committee has been formed from among the Caretaker Government Advisors, to negotiate the settlement of the above dispute, presumably outside the constitutional provisions, if not possible respecting the constitution. The result has just came out through a national broadcast made by the President and Chief Advisor of the Caretaker Government Prof Dr Iajuddin Ahmed, confirming that Justice M A Aziz agreed to go on 90-day leave to resolve the ongoing political deadlock centering the popular demand for reconstitution of the Election Commission.

Article 106: Over the above two major disputes like (i) President’s take over the position of the Chief Advisor of the Caretaker Government and (ii) the removal of the Chief Election Commissioner, under article 106, although there are reservations under 12th amendment to the constitution in relation to reintroduction of parliamentary system, the President could refer both the questions to the Appellate Division for its opinion, for wider acceptability. To our utter surprising, he did not see that such questions have already arisen on both the issues, resulting to that; the street violence is in action for an indefinite period, in which already more than 50 people were killed and about thousand others were injured. Although, for the

time being, it looks there is a political standoff following the decision of taking leave by the Chief and other Election Commissioners, the above issues may reappear at any moment, hence, advisory jurisdiction of Supreme Court under Article 106 may be used by the President.

Article 96: Under this article, we have the Supreme Judicial Council consists of the Chief Justice of Bangladesh, and the two next senior Judges. The President, alternative to Article 106, could also inquire into the capacity or conduct of the Chief and other Election Commissioners, as they are not removable from their offices except in like manner as a Judge under Article 96(4) (b), which he did not do either. Effectively, under Article 96(6) of the constitution, if, after making the inquiry, the Council reports to the President that in its opinion the Judge has ceased to be capable of properly performing the functions of his office or has been guilty of gross misconduct, the President shall, by order, remove the Judge from office. More importantly, here misconduct may mean ‘any act unbecoming of a gentleman’ to include the allegations like ‘partisan’ and ‘contempt of court’ etc, For these and a number of other political reasons, the politicians, like the LDP leaders, threatened to declare one demand instead of all the above, the removal of the President himself, and if it happens, under Article 54, the Speaker will have to take over the position to discharge all Presidential functions until a President is elected or until the President resumes the functions of his office, as the case may be. The country is in serious political crisis, and still can no way be said to be safe from heading for unknown destination, even if the 14 party alliances decide to participate in the election.

Failing to take advantage of the constitutional provisions, as discussed above, in case of any further and/or severe national crisis, the third eye, the people of the Republic may exercise their final authority, to find a way out for peace, progress and prosperity, as confirmed in the constitution under its Article 7 that ‘all powers in the Republic belong to the people, and their exercise on behalf of the people shall be effected only under, and by the authority of, this Constitution’.

Finally, as said by Chief Justice Charles Evans Huges, ‘The Constitution not only is, but ought to be, what the judges say it is’, and therefore, we not only look for Constitutional Provisions during our national crises, we must, at the same time, respect the judiciary, as the

Supreme Court is a very powerful body in upholding our constitutional rights and in shaping the course of our civilization at large.

CHAPTER-FOUR Activities of the Caretaker Governments in Bangladesh A caretaker government was first introduced in 1990 when three party alliances jointly made a demand for it. It was constitutional zed in 1996 by the Parliament dominated

by Bangladesh Nationalist Party. A Caretaker government is headed by a Chief Adviser who enjoys the same power as the regular Prime Minister of the country except defence matters.

The Advisors function as Ministers. Since 1996, the Caretaker government has held the elections of 1996, 2001 and 2008.

After the assassination of Zia, General Ershad, the then Chief of Army seized power and became the head of the state. The Council of Advisors of Ershad was drawn from the members of the civil and the military bureaucracy. He behaved as a military dictator. In 1988 he amended the constitution to make Islam the state religion. Most sectors were opened up to private investment. He also launched a political party named Jatiya Party (JP) in 1986, which still exists. However there was growing discontent amongst the public against the dictatorship of Ershad and gained momentum in 1987, and became severe in 1990 with the participation of all the major student organizations including the student wings of the two leading parties, the Awami League and the BNP. Civil society groups, particularly the professional associations, actively joined the movement for the restoration of democracy. Faced with the public uprising Ershad resigned and a neutral Caretaker Government was formed under the then Chief Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed and thus for the first time a government was changed in independent Bangladesh through popular uprising. The general election was held in 1991 under the caretaker government.

Chief Advisers since 1991: •

Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed - Election of 1991

•

Justice Muhammad Habibur Rahman - Election of 1996

•

Justice Latifur Rahman - Eleciton of 2001

• Justice Fazlul Haque - resigned

• Profssor Iajuddin Ahmad - was compelled to resign • Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmad - Election of 20086 4.1. Activities of Caretaker government of 1990: In Bangladesh the demand for neutral caretaker government largely originated from a lack of general agreement among the competing parties to maintain legitimate means of changing government and uphold unbiased election system. During the pre-independence days, the elections of 1954 and 1970 were widely acclaimed as fair polls having significant impact on the people's movements which ultimately led to the emergence of sovereign Bangladesh in 1971.

In the period since independence, there was, however, a gradual public alienation from the election process owing to alleged electoral malpractices. As such, election results were always a foregone conclusion rendering no positive effects on the political process. The crisis of people's confidence in the stage-managed election system reached its peak during the rule of General Hussain M. Ershad. Restoration of democracy through fair polls was ultimately transformed into a united anti-Ershad movement by the combined opposition parties with a forceful demand for a neutral caretaker government. Opposition formula for the formation of neutral caretaker government was categorically mentioned in the 1990 Joint Declaration of the three (political) Party Alliances. The Declaration specified inter alia that the political alliances would participate in the elections only when conducted by a neutral non-partisan caretaker government; but before that Ershad government would have to be forced to resign and an interim caretaker government would be formed; thereafter, election commission would be reconstituted by the caretaker government to hold free and fair election.

In the face of the anti-government public outburst and mass upsurge, General Ershad had to yield to the movement. As such the framework for the formation of caretaker government advanced when the Joint Declaration was translated into reality on 6 December 1990 through the handing over state power to the nominee of the combined opposition Justice shahabuddin ahmed, the chief justice of Bangladesh. Earlier, the then Vice President Moudud Ahmed resigned and Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed was installed as the Vice President. Then General Ershad stepped down from the presidency giving his charge to the Chief Justice emerging as the country's Acting President and head of the neutral caretaker government. Subsequently, 17 Advisers of the caretaker government were appointed.

6

Please Visit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caretaker_government- Last Visited:-13.07.2009

4.2. Activities of the Caretaker government, 1996: After the 1991 election, BNP under Begum Khaleda Zia as the Prime Minister formed the government with the support of Jamaat –e-Islami, another leading political party in Bangladesh besides BNP and AL. Both BNP and the Awami League worked together in parliament and a constitutional amendment was passed reintroducing the parliamentary form of government. During the Khaleda Zia government notable progress was achieved in the field of education through the introduction of free and compulsory primary education, free education up to class X for female students and adoption of food for education program etc.7 In 1990 the demand for caretaker government was raised by the mainstream opposition political parties with the immediate objective of removing Ershad government from power and restoring democracy through fair polls. Thus any future necessity for such caretaker administration during elections was not considered by the Joint Declaration of the opposition.

Although there was a proposal from the left parties for conducting subsequent three elections under a caretaker government, this was not supported by the two major parties, Awami league and Bangladesh nationalist party (BNP).

In 1991, the restoration of parliamentary system on the basis of consensus marked a positive development. But soon disagreements on major national issues, mutual intolerance and lack of trust among the competing parties confirmed that the issue of caretaker government became the central theme of Bangladesh politics only two years after the reintroduction of parliamentary democracy. The opposition through sustained boycott of the Sangsad and frequent hartals tried to force the ruling party to accept their demand.

At the initial phase of their movement, opposition parties did not have unanimity with regard to the framework of the proposed caretaker government. This was visualized by three separate bills submitted by the jamaat-e-islami Bangladesh, Awami League and jatiya party to the parliamentary secretariat in 1991, October 1993 and mid November 1993 respectively.

The essence of these bills was more or less similar, but differed on selection of the head of the caretaker government. While Awami League was in favour of appointing the Chief Justice as the head of the interim government, Jatiya Party proposed for selecting a neutral person as the head of the caretaker government, and Jamaat-e-Islami demanded for forming 7

Please Visit: http://www.webbangladesh.com/history_culture/history_politicalcondition.htm.

Last Visited:10.08.2009

an advisory council headed by a neutral person to be appointed by the president. These bills, however, were not placed in the Jatiya Sangsad because of opposition boycott of the Sangsad and government's reluctance to consider the case.

In the face of continuous agitation of the combined opposition, the Fifth Sangsad was dissolved and preparations were underway for forming the Sixth Sangsad to enact constitutional amendment for caretaker government. Having failed to convince the mainstream opposition, the ruling BNP moved unilaterally to legalise the caretaker government after the Sixth Jatiya Sangsad was constituted on 19 March 1996. Thus on 21 March 1996 the Thirteenth Amendment bill was raised in the Sangsad, and on 26 March 1996 it was passed by 268-0 vote.

With the passage of Thirteenth Amendment, Articles 58(B) (C) (D) (E) was included in the constitution which keep the following major provisions regarding caretaker government: (a) after the dissolution of the parliament there will be an 11-member non-party caretaker government headed by the Chief Adviser; (b) the caretaker government will be collectively responsible to the President; (c) the Chief Adviser will be appointed by the head of the state while other ten Advisers will be selected as per advice of the Chief Adviser; (d) the Chief Adviser will hold the status of prime minister while an Adviser will enjoy the status of a minister; (e) The non-party caretaker government will discharge its functions as an interim government and will carry on routine jobs, except in the case of necessity it will not make any policy decisions; (f) The caretaker government will assist the Election Commission to hold general polls impartially, fairly and peacefully; (g) This caretaker government will be dissolved on the date a new Prime Minister assumes his office.

After formalising the measures for caretaker government and in the midst of massive opposition agitation, the controversial Sixth Jatiya Sangsad was dissolved on 30 March 1996.

Subsequently a caretaker government was formed under the Thirteenth Amendment and the former Chief Justice, Justice muhammad habibur rahman, took over the charge as the Chief Adviser. Four days later on 3 April 1996, ten distinguished personalities were sworn in as the

Advisers of the caretaker government. The caretaker government successfully discharged its duty of holding the free and fair seventh constitutional parliamentary election on 12 June 1996, and continued in office till 23 June 1996, when the newly elected Awami League led by sheikh hasina formed the govrnment.

Sheikh Hasina formed what she called a "Government of National Consensus" in June 1996, which included one minister from the Jatiya Party and another from the Jatiyo Samajtantric Dal, a very small leftist party. The Jatiya Party never entered into a formal coalition arrangement, and party president H.M. Ershad withdrew his support from the government in September 1997. Only three parties had more than 10 members elected to the 1996 Parliament: The Awami League, BNP, and Jatiya Party. Jatiya Party president, Ershad, was released from prison on bail in January 1997.

Although international and domestic election observers found the June 1996 election free and fair, the BNP protested alleged vote rigging by the Awami League. Ultimately, however, the BNP party decided to join the new Parliament. The BNP soon charged that police and Awami League activists were engaged in large-scale harassment and jailing of opposition activists.

At the end of 1996, the BNP staged a parliamentary walkout over this and other grievances but returned in January 1997 under a four-point agreement with the ruling party. The BNP asserted that this agreement was never implemented and later staged another walkout in August 1997. The BNP returned to Parliament under another agreement in March 1998.

In June 1999, the BNP and other opposition parties again began to abstain from attending Parliament. Opposition parties have staged an increasing number of nationwide general strikes, rising from 6 days of general strikes in 1997 to 27 days in 1999. A four-party opposition alliance formed at the beginning of 1999 announced that it would boycott parliamentary by-elections and local government elections unless the government took steps demanded by the opposition to ensure electoral fairness. The government did not take these steps, and the opposition has subsequently boycotted all elections, including municipal council elections in February 1999, several parliamentary by-elections, and the Chittagong city corporation elections in January 2000. The opposition demands that the Awami League government step down immediately to make way for a caretaker government to preside over paliamentary and local government.

4.3. Activities of the Caretaker government of 2001: Following the provision for caretaker government through Thirteen Amendment of the Constitution the third caretaker government was formed on 15 July 2001 and the former Chief Justice, Justice Latifur Rahman, took over charge as the Chief Adviser. After two days, ten Advisers of the caretaker government were sworn in. The caretaker government discharged its prime duty of holding the eighth parliamentary election on 1 October 2001, and continued in office till 10 October 2001 when the new elected BNP government led by begum khaleda zia assumed state power.

In the election held on 1 October 2001, the BNP led Four Party Alliance got 214 seats in the parliament out of 300 and won the election with a two-third majority of seats in the parliament. Khaleda Zia was once again sworn in as the Prime Minister of Bangladesh.

However Khaleda Zia's this term was plagued by rising religious militancy, terrorism, continued spiraling of corruption (including successive damning reports by Transparency International), a rise in alleged attacks on minority groups (such as Hindus and Ahmadiyas as documented by the US State Department and Amnesty International) and an increasingly explosive political environment.

The neutral caretaker governments of Bangladesh had been the products of intense opposition movement centering on the forceful demand for free and fair general polls. By legalizing caretaker government through Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution in 1996, Bangladesh has founded a unique example in the existing parliamentary systems.

4.4. Activities of the Caretaker Government (2006-2008): The national election of Bangladesh was held on 29 December 2008 under the Caretaker government formed with Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed as the Chief Adviser on 13 January 2007. This was the third Caretaker government formed after the tenure of the government of prime minister Khaleda Zia ended in October 2006. The Caretaker government of Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed functioned without legislative authority as it continued to function after its scheduled tenure of 120 days ended on 12 May 2007. All decisions taken after this date must be ratified by the parliament for the sake of legitimacy.

The Caretaker government of Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed was a military controlled and has made extensive use of the military to stymie the chaos that preceded the 11th of January, 2007.

From the very outset however, the government made it clear that they were there not only

arrange a free and fair election, but also to make sure that all aspects that are connected to it are reviewed properly.

In defiance of the Constitutional provision the Caretaker government of Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed postponed the national election 29 December, 2008.

After much confusion and turmoil that continued for months towards the end of this BNP regime, a caretaker government was formed with support of the military in January 2007. A state of emergency was declared and Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed, a former Governor of the central bank took charge as the Chief Advisor of the Caretaker Government. The Caretaker Government with the support of the armed forces started arresting corrupt politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen. Sheikh Hasina , Khaleda Zia –with her two sons Tariq Rahman and Aarafat Rahman Koko- got arrested after corruption charges were brought against them.

In February 2007 alone 15 top politicians got arrested, at the end of the year this number crossed 100. The major agendas of the Caretaker Government being to remove corruption from the political as well as other sectors of the country as well as holding a free and fair election towards the end of 2008.

4.4.1. Mr. Iajuddin Ahmed, President and Chief Adviser of the Caretaker Government: When Justice KM Hasan, the last retired Chief Justice of Bangladesh expressed his unwillingness to assume the charge of the Chief Adviser of the Caretaker Government on 28 October 2006, the Honourable President Professor Iazuddin Ahmed was constitutionally bound to explore the other options in selecting the Chief Adviser as per provisions of the constitution in Article 58 C. The Caretaker Government functions as a collective body and the Chief Adviser is only one of the eleven Advisers as per Article 58 B. During the term of the Caretaker Government there is no place for any Minister, Minister of State or Deputy Minister. The Caretaker Government is charged with the responsibility for aiding and assisting the Election Commission “that may be required for holding the general election of members of Parliament peacefully, fairly and impartially” as per Article 58D. The Caretaker Government headed by Mr. Iazuddin Ahmed is in violation of all constitutional requirements. His partisan role and the virtual continuation of the erstwhile BNP-Jamat regime forced a Grand Alliance of all the political parties leaving a truncated

BNP, the Jamat and rejected small coteries of IOJ and JP with the erstwhile four Party Alliance.

As a result the Grand Alliance decided on 3 January 2007 to resist the election scheduled for 22 January and withdrew all their candidates from the election race. Now the candidates belong to only BNP, Jamat and some of their dummies and lackeys.

The resignation of Mr Iazuddin Ahmed as the Chief Adviser and appointment of a substitute strictly following the constitution. * The appointment of a new competent and neutral Election Commission that will prepare the voter lists and undertake other necessary reform. * The renewal of the 2000 voter list by a house to house visit, photographing the voters and publishing the list before the announcement of the election schedule.

Finally, announcing the election schedule providing the minimum required time for holding the election and completing the process. De politicization of civil Administration particularly in the district administration, police administration and election commission offices will be completed before the announcement of the election schedule.

4.4.2. False Statement made by Mr. Iajuddin Ahmed President and Chief Adviser of the Caretaker Government: 1. He tried all options to choose a neutral Chief Adviser in accordance with the constitution and upheld the constitution by assuming the responsibility in the last resort.

Actually he did not take any steps under article 58 C (3), (4) and (5) of the constitution. He did not consider the eligible retired Chief Justices, made an untrue statement about a retired Judge of the Appellate Division and did not try for an acceptable citizen at all. On 28th October when he called the representatives of the two major political alliances for the first time, he declared his intention to become the Chief Advisor. And on 29 October in the face of rejection by 14 Party combine assumed the office violating the Constitution.

2. He claimed to have appointed an effective Council of Advisers. 2. He ignored his advisers although they were chosen by him and never acknowledged that along with them he was collectively responsible. The council of advisers has been made redundant by him. He authorized announcement of the election schedule without even informing the Council. He ordered mobilization of the armed forces in aid of civil authority without consulting the Council. Four dignified advisers with high national reputation were compelled to resign as

their views were not given due weight and decisions were taken behind their back. Even the consensus proposal worked out by the Council, of which he was a party, was later ignored by him.

3. He has been doing his job giving due respect to the provisions of constitution. 3. He himself clearly stated before the senior Secretariat officers that the country is being ruled virtually under the presidential form of government. Later in a press statement he tried unsuccessfully to fudge the statement. The country, according to constitution, is being run by a Caretaker Government in the parliamentary system.

4. He claimed to have given appointment to non-partisan and competent persons as Advisers in substitution of the resigned Advisers. 4. The four new advisers, who have been appointed after the resignation of the four former advisers, are virtual non-entities. Their statements before the media on many occasions amply manifest their low level of competence and understanding.

5. He informed some leaders that the Chief Election Commissioner Mr. M.A. Aziz would resign. He also gave the nation to understand that the CEC would go abroad on long leave. 5.

In actual fact Mr. M.A. Aziz simply went on leave and is very much in Dhaka enjoying all facilities as the C.E.C and possibly has been meddling in the affairs of the Election Commission to help the BNP-Jamat Alliance.

6. It is claimed by his government that the Election Commission is acting as per the constitution.

E.C. Mr Mahfuzur Rahman usurped the office of the CEC and declared himself as the Acting C.E.C although there is no such provision under the constitution or any other law. The President has not taken any step against this unconstitutional move.

7. He claimed and promised to the Advisers that two neutral and generally acceptable Election Commissioners would be appointed and accordingly made two new appointments..

7. There could not be any worse lie such as this claim. Mr. Modabbir H Chowdhury was campaigning to be a BNP nominee for 2007 parliamentary election from a Habigonj constituency. The print media proved the point on the day following his appointment by publishing his posters seeking nomination for BNP. Moreover, he does not have general

acceptability for his role during the liberation war and subsequent performance in the police department. Another newly appointed E.C Mr Saiful Islam also did not have a clean record as a member of the judicial service and allegations of corruption were made against him. He was also working as the agent of Khandaker Sahidul Islam, former secretary to P.M. Khaleda Zia, who is a BNP candidate for Parliament election. Once the mischief committed by him in the new appointment of ECs was done, it was agreed that two ECs M/S. S.M. Zakaria and Modabbir H Chowdhury would go on leave. But ultimately only Zakaria has gone on leave for a month. Mention may be made that in 1996 the Chief Adviser Justice Habibur Rahman had transferred Mr. Zakaria from Election Commission for his alleged link with a particular party. He was kept out of the E.C for a long time. But the BNP-Jamaat government brought him back first as Secretary to the Commission and later as the Election Commissioner.

8. He authorized announcement of the election schedule on 27 November 2006 that assumed that voter list was corrected and available. 8. Actually no voter list is available even now, i.e., 7 January 2007. Updating had to be continued till 18 December but this has been done in a highly flawed and unreliable manner. Names of many Awami League supporters and members of religious minorities have been deleted with the help of the party workers of BNP-Jamaat. In the name of inclusion of new names it is not clear as to how many false voters have been registered and it is not likely to be available for checking before the Election Day. 9. He takes credit for reshuffling the administration thoroughly. He has actually made certain transfers keeping in mind his own partisan agenda. Virtually very little of administrative change was effected on the recommendation of 14-party combine. (a) Changes made in some important posts, which are related to ensuing election, have proved more damaging than the previous one. (b) Most of the contractual appointments terminated so far, are not important/relevant for election. Those appointments which, on the other hand, should have been done away with, have not been touched. (c) Right from the top to the bottom level, the whole police administration is still fully politicised and acting in favour of the immediate past government.

(d) Former ministers, state ministers, deputy ministers, ruling party MPs and leaders have got DCs, SPs, T.N.Os and O.Cs of Thanans according to their choice and the Chief Adviser has been terming these transfers in administration as a major reshuffle. In fact, with these transfers, administration has become more politicised. (e) 361 civil officers who were deprived from getting promotion due to their neutral and nonpartisan role during the BNP-Jamaat rule were given promotion during this Caretaker regime.

But the posting of these newly promoted officers have been stayed at the directive of the higher court. An unknown plaintiff who is in no way affected due to this promotion, had filed a petition before the court seeking stay. The court for mysterious reason has asked the govt. not to give any posting to these officers for next two months i.e. till the process of next general election is over. The govt. law officer i.e, Attorney general did not contest the case, rather he had supported the move taken by the petitioner by saying before the court that the Caretaker Government could not give any such promotions to the officers. If these newly promoted officers, were given posting as DC, ADC, TNO or at the secretariat, people could have seen some sort of real change enshrining neutrality and transparency

in the

administration. (f) Humble High court had given a historical directive to the effect that any candidate for any public election, particularly in the general election, must furnish information regarding his financial assets, academic background, professional status, criminal records etc. But upon getting a petition from an unknown person, the effectiveness of the high court ruling has been kept suspended unilaterally by a chamber judge of the Supreme Court. The petitioner in the main plaint was not asked to appear nor his lawyer consulted. The Attorney General also did not oppose this move. (g) The President appears to be intimidating the nation every now and then. What is the motive behind frequent deployment of army and sending them back for taking rest? The law and order situation in the country never warranted such army deployment. So why does the president resort to such practice which might tarnish the image of our Armed Forces both at home and abroad?

4.4.3. Press Freedom in Bangladesh-2006-2007:

The declaration of a state of emergency in January this year, with blanket media censorship, struck at the heart of press freedom in Bangladesh. Sparked by recurring turmoil between the two major political parties, the state of emergency was declared on January 11, with an army-backed caretaker administration and a presidential order to gag the media.

There was a complete news blackout for nearly two days, with all television channels ordered to suspend broadcasting. The newspapers were also advised to treat news „carefully and reports and articles have been published in freely all media. However, following a series of meetings between editors, senior journalists and the officials of the newly formed caretaker administration, the ban was relaxed allowing the media to report factually, especially on political stories. Television channels went back on-air with news programs and the newspapers began to publish stories, albeit with some degree of censorship.

The Information Ministry is now encouraging the media to support the interim administrations cause, resulting in a kind of self-censorship, as no media reports wish to be perceived as critical to the present administration. Government advice for journalists The government issued a letter on April 17, 2007 to all media outlets asking them not to publish or broadcast ill-motivated, harassing or misinformative reports about anybody.

"Recently we have noticed that some of the media are publishing or broadcasting dishonest and unprofessional political statements, satirical sketches, cartoons, features, etc, which are creating confusion among the people," said the letter signed by Iftekhar Hossain, principal information officer of the Press Information Department under the Ministry of Information.

"You are requested to be more vigilant to ensure that the mass media do not provide any room for activities, propaganda or reports that are unnecessarily harassing or misinformative about anyone," the letter stated. "The government hopes that the country's mass media will take greater care in publishing/broadcasting apolitical and substantial news, features, discussions, satirical sketches and cartoons, in order to maintain the positive role of the electronic and print media," the letter added. "Moreover, it has also been noticed that some newspapers are publishing motivated and exaggerated reports about government officials, businessmen, professionals, intellectuals, and politicians in an effort to create confusion among the people," the letter went on. "A few of the news media are spreading intentional misinformation about people of different classes and professions as a strategy for illegally extorting money, which is counterproductive to healthy, constructive and responsible journalism," Iftekhar said in the letter. The letter also stated, "The mass media's role in carrying out the government's ongoing multifaceted reform programmes has been praised by

all quarters. Because of this positive role, the government is always proactive in maintaining the freedom of the electronic and print media in spite of the country being under a state of emergency."

"As a result, the government has been flexible and tolerant in implementing the provisions of the Emergency Powers Act, 2007," the letter said Shocking number of targeted journalists Prior to the caretaker administration, the media faced troubled times. The ministers, members of parliament, local leaders and workers of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) engaged in media-bashing and harassment of journalists when corruption and anomalies were uncovered by the press. Statistics show that the leaders and activists of the BNP-led fourparty alliance were involved in at least 89 incidents of violence against journalists in 2006 alone. At least 462 journalists reported being attacked or harassed in 238 separate incidents.

Among them, 247 were physically assaulted and 73 received death threats. Some 43 cases were filed in which at least 137 journalists were being sued. Additionally, journalists were verbally abused by the political stalwarts and their activists, repeating the trend of previous years. This continued until the neutral caretaker administration was handed power in October.

4.4.4. Reforms by Caretaker Government: There has been a major change in the election system as the caretaker government has introduced Voter ID cards (with photograph) for the first time. The Bangladesh Army including members of other military forces were deployed throughout the nation including the remotest areas. They were equipped with laptops, and small digital cameras in an effort that would result in the most orderly voter's list in Bangladesh's history.

The government had also made significant advances in their drive to bring corrupted politicians to justice. The anti-corruption unit of the government known as Durniti Domon Commission (DUDOC) were able to incriminate a large number of politicians including former Prime Ministers and Chairpersons of the two major parties - Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina.

4.4.5. Media Owners and Journalists Jailed, Accused and Attacked: During the anti-corruption drive of the caretaker government, the joint forces have arrested a number of media owners. They face a variety of charges including promoting criminals, money laundering, abuse of authority and extortion. Those detained include the owner of television channels NTV and RTV and Bengali language newspaper Amar Desh, Mosaddek Ali Falu (who also happens to a politician of the BNP), Enayetur Rahman Bappi,

managing director of NTV, and Mahammad Abdus Selim, chairperson of Channel 1. In the print media, persons arrested include Nurul Islam Babul, owner of the Bengali daily Dainik Jugantor, and Atiqullah Khan Masud, editor and publisher of Dainik Janakantha. Masud was detained at his office by joint forces, at about 10.30pm on March 8.

Staff was not allowed to enter or leave until Masud was taken. He was not informed of the reason for his arrest but the officer said it was an order of a higher authority. Although a Dhaka court approved Masuds one-month detention from March 13, the High Court ordered the government to show cause as to why Masuds detention would not be considered illegal.

Government press releases state that Masud was detained for running the newspaper on foreign funds and publishing propaganda to tarnish the image of the government. He was also accused of occupying land illegally in the name of housing businesses. Masud also faces a number of defamation charges, including a case filed by a lawyer from the BNP, and his reporter Shangkar Kumar Dye, for running a 'defamatory' news item about the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) on December 5. Barrister Omar Sadat, the son-in-law of former minister and BNP leader Shajahan Siraj, also filed a similar case which argued the accused published a story headlined 'RAB shows its true colours at Hawa Bhaban's directives,' which tarnished the public image of RAB. Metropolitan magistrate Syed Mohammad Muzibul Haq, has ordered a judicial inquiry into the matter.

On February 26 the 12-storey building which houses private television channels NTV and RTV, and national daily newspaper Dainik Amar Desh, almost completely burnt down when it was set alight. Four people died, including a woman, and many others were seriously injured. Whether it was an act of sabotage or an accident remains unclear. The television channels broadcast had to be suspended after the fire damaged all its equipment, control rooms and studios. Dainik Amar Desh continues to publish from a different location. NTV has resumed a test transmission for a couple of hours daily.

4.4.6. Bangladesh: Partial Lifting of Ban on Politics Falls Far Short: The Bangladeshi caretaker government’s decision to partially lift the ban on political activities is not nearly enough to address widespread restrictions on basic freedoms and rampant human rights abuses in the country, Human Rights Watch said today.

The government imposed a total ban on politics on March 8, two months after it imposed a state of emergency. On September 10, the head of the government, Fakhruddin Ahmed, said

that the authorities were lifting restrictions on “indoor” politics in the capital Dhaka “to create an environment conducive to talks with political parties.”

“The idea that politics is banned in a democracy is bizarre. If the Bangladeshi authorities are serious about restoring democracy, they must fully end the ban on political activities,” said Sophie Richardson, Asia advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. “Politics is not a sport that can be played only in an indoor arena.”

The move was aimed at facilitating discussions between political parties and the Election Commission, which is revising the country’s election rules. The Election Commission, led by ATM Shamsul Huda, has been assigned the responsibility to institute electoral reforms.

However, the commission said that these reforms would not be possible without consultations with the political parties. The government announced the partial lifting of the ban before the commission begins discussions with political parties, scheduled for September 12.

Human Rights Watch expressed concerns about emergency rules that undermine basic due process rights. While certain restrictions on some rights during properly declared states of national emergency are permitted under international law, the measures under the government’s emergency law have not been limited to “the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation.”

Under Bangladesh’s current state of emergency, the government has restricted political and trade union activities and prohibited the media from publishing anything that can be considered “provocative.” Tens of thousands of people – and perhaps as many as 200,000, according to some reports – have been arrested under the state of emergency without proper judicial oversight. A large number of offenses have been made “non-bailable,” meaning that many detainees face indefinite detention without trial. The courts have frequently been sidelined from ensuring due process of law. Many detainees are being held in unofficial places of detention.

Bangladesh’s emergency laws have created an atmosphere ripe for torture and mistreatment, which has been widely alleged by victims and family members. Human Rights Watch has confirmed these allegations in cases that it has investigated.

Freedom of the press has also come under assault by the government. In some districts, the army has summoned journalists and photographed them in blatant efforts at intimidation, warning them not to publish anything critical of the security forces. Even as the caretaker government announced that it would make the state-run Bangladesh Television (BTV) an effective, autonomous body, it pulled the country’s only privately owned 24-hour news channel off the air, days after it warned the channel not to broadcast footage of recent antigovernment riots.

“The government should make the same commitment to ending human rights abuses that it it has made to fighting corruption,” said Richardson. “The army and other security forces need to be reined in, and censorship has to end.

4.4.7. ACC sues AL leader, ex-minister Sajeda: The Anticorruption Commission has filed a case against Awami League presidium member and former minister Syeda Sajeda Chowdhury, on charges of illegal earnings and concealing wealth-related information. ACC assistant director Mozahar Ali Sarder filed the case with Ramna police Thursday afternoon. ACC director general (administration) Col Hanif Iqbal told reporters earlier in the day: "In the wealth statement Sajeda Chowdhury submitted to the commission, she hid information about Tk 13.75 lakh, which she earned through illegal means."

The case also alleges that Sajeda spent money on private building works in her village home and on buying a plot in Dhaka's upmarket Banani residential area that were not mentioned in her

wealth

statement.

"The commission detected these expenditures in its investigation," said Iqbal.

The ACC sent a wealth statement notice to Sajeda Chowdhury on Nov 15 last year. She submitted an account of her assets totalling Tk 53.41 lakh and 100 tolas of gold ornaments to the commission on Feb 11.The ACC also approved separate cases to be filed against former AL state minister AKM Jahangir Hossain, Daily Samokal publisher AK Azad and Khaleda Zia's former assistant private secretary Abdul Matin, Iqbal told reporters Thursday.

4.4.8. ACC sues Khaleda, Tarique for embezzlement:

The Anticorruption Commission has filed a new case against former prime minister Khaleda Zia, son Tarique Rahman, and five others on charges of embezzlement from the Zia Orphanage Trust.8"The commission approved the graft case against seven people, including Khaleda Zia and her elder son Tarique Rahman, on charges of embezzling Tk 2.10 core from the Zia Orphanage Trust," ACC director general (administration) Col Hanif Iqbal told reporters earlier. Others accused in the case include former BNP lawmakers Kazi Salimul Haque, Syed Ahmed, Gias Uddin Ahmed, Sharfuddin Ahmed and Mominur Rahman.

According to case details, a foreign organisation in 1992 donated Zia Orphanage Trust a Tk 4.66 crore grant, which was deposited with a bank and swelled to Tk 5.3 crore eventually, thanks to interest rates. Later, the fund was allocated for the Trust branches in Bogra and Bagerhat. In a probe, the ACC found that a large part of the money was not spent for the welfare of orphans and was splurged for other purposes. The then prime minister Khaleda Zia's office allocated the fund. Khaleda was quizzed about the alleged fund embezzlement at special

jail,

the

probe

details

said.

The Trust's chairman Tarique Rahman and member Arafat Rahman Coco were also interrogated.

4.4.10. ACC approves chargesheet against Babar: The Anticorruption Commission has approved a chargesheet against former state minister for home Lutfozzaman Babar, for amassing illegal wealth and concealing wealthrelated information, an official said Thursday. 9The commission has also sent notice to seven people seeking wealth statements, director general Colonel Hanif Iqbal said at a press briefing

at

the

ACC

office

in

Segunbagicha.

The ACC filed the case against Babar on Jan 13, with Ramna Police Station, accusing him with amassing illegally earned assets worth over Tk 7 crore in addition to those mentioned in his

wealth

statement

submitted

to

the

ACC.

The seven to receive wealth statement notices are: manager of Bangladesh Biman Md Shafiullah, acting chief engineer of Chittagong City Corporation Md Nizam Uddin, deputy secretary of the communications ministry Md Manjur Rahman, executive engineers of the Roads and Highways Department Md Shafiul Azam Bhuiyan, Sanaul Haque, Piar Ahmed and Khandaker Golam Mostafa, RHD deputy divisional engineer Golam Mohammad and RHD senior assistant Md Mazaharul Islam.

8

Ibid

9

Ibid

4.4.11. ACC to serve notice and press charges against suspects/corrupts: The Anticorruption Commission will ask BNP joint secretary general Goyeshwar Chandra Roy to submit a wealth statement to the graft watchdog, an official said Monday. 10 "After completion of all procedure, the ACC will send a notice to Goyeshwar in a day or two," said ACC director general (administration) Col Hanif Iqbal in a news briefing.

Besides, the ACC will serve notices on Road and Highways former executive engineer Md Abdul Azim Joarder and his wife Selina Joarder seeking statements of their wealth.

In another development, Col Iqbal said, investigators have been permitted to press charges in four corruption cases against former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia's nephew Shahrin Islam Tuhin, Awami League presidium member Sajeda Chowdhury's son Md Shahadab Akbar, former manager of Islami Bank's Shahjadpur branch in Sirajganj district Abdus Sabur Khan and Fatikchhari upazila education officer Md Nuruzzaman.

The commission has also decided to file cases against 21 people, including two Roads and Highways executive engineers, on charges of embezzling Tk 174.35 crore from Meghna and Meghna-Gomati Bridge toll plaza.

CHAPTER-FIVE Caretaker Government and Election Commission A multi-party parliamentary democratic system has been established for the last 15 years (1991-2006) following the mass upsurge in 1990 against the military rule. Public opinion is directly reflected through this kind of parliamentary system, for which a free and fair election is a prerequisite. High level of integrity and sincerity from the candidates along with the roles and responsibilities played by the Election Commission (EC) is crucial in the electoral process. However, in the previous national elections questions were raised regarding the roles

10

Ibid

played by the EC, the integrity of the candidates, and the competence of those who later became Members of the Parliament.

The concept of a non-party caretaker government (CG) was introduced through the Constitution as the credibility of organising free and fair elections by the civil government raised concern. The CG is supposed to hold an election participated by all the political parties. The CG is to ensure a neutral administration and an ideal violence-free environment for organising the election. However, it has been observed that neither the EC nor the CG took any step to address the violations of electoral laws and rules violated by the candidates as well as the political parties.

Over the last one and half decade the election culture of Bangladesh has grown where a candidate’s acceptability depends upon the candidate’s party symbol, successes and failures of the previous government, his/her party’s activities, and his/her monetary and cadre power.

In the last few elections the trend of winning elections by nominating candidates with monetary and muscle power became more and more prominent. Now the political parties give nominations to people who are owners of black money, terrorists, and industrialists. These candidates often take extra-legal steps violating the electoral laws and rules in order to win in elections by any means. Such violations include violating the electoral code of conduct, vote rigging, influencing vote counting, creating environment for vote rigging, and exploiting administrative set up.

According to law one can be considered as a candidate only after the finalisation of nomination. Only after that one candidate can start election campaigning. However, it is observed that the candidates start campaigning long before the declaration of the election schedule. They do it through poster, graffiti, public relations, processions, and motor-cycle rallies. They do these in order to draw attention of the people along with the party for getting nominations. In Bangladesh election expenditure is one of the major reasons of corruption.

Such large election expense has adverse impact upon the structural development, investment environment and the development process of the country. Such election expenses have been limited to a maximum Tk five lac for one candidate. However, the EC has so far failed to monitor such expenditure. One of the main reasons is that no effective mechanism has been developed to monitor and check such expenditure.

Although a large number of national and local level organisations conduct Election Day observation, they largely cover issues relating to the activities of the caretaker government, law and order situation before and during election, voter turn out, election results and political trends. There is a dearth of research on the electoral behaviour of candidates and its impacts.

At this backdrop Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) brought the issue of tracking the election process under its research agenda. This research was initiated in 40 constituencies located in the districts where the Committees of Concerned Citizens (CCCs), formed with the support from TIB, operate. Information on the nature and amount spent for election campaign incurred by the candidates was collected from these constituencies, selected through purposive sampling based on the lowest difference of vote cast between the top two contestants in the last national election. However, considering the quality of data, this report is prepared based on information collected from 38 constituencies. These constituencies are located all over Bangladesh in six administrative divisions. The main objective of this study is to come up with an analysis of the nature and extent of electoral rules violated by the candidates. This study aims to contribute to the efforts in developing a guideline on monitoring the violations of electoral codes of conduct by candidates in future national elections. In this study, information has been collected from both secondary and primary sources.

Secondary sources of information included election related publications, published and unpublished research reports, election monitoring reports, and reports published in newspapers, broadcasted in electronic media and posted in websites. Primary sources of information included field level observation and investigation in the concerned constituency.

5.1. Mandate of the caretaker government: Taking care of the national parliamentary election is the sole agenda of the Non-Party Caretaker Government. It is, in fact, an interim government for carrying out the routine functions of that stipulated period. Article 58D (1) specifically provides that except in case of necessity for the discharge of such functions, the Caretaker Government shall not take any policy decision.

The term of the Caretaker Government is three months within which it will have to hold the general election of Parliament. Clause (3) of Article 123 plainly states: "A general election of

members of Parliament shall be held within ninety days after Parliament is dissolved, whether by reason of the expiration of its term or otherwise than by reason of such expiration."

5.2. Act of God: The Caretaker Government cannot extend its term. But what will happen in case of act of god (a sudden and inevitable occurrence caused by natural forces and not by the agency of man, such as a flood, earthquake, or a similar catastrophe)? The Constitution (Thirteenth Amendment) Act, 1996 does not deal with the situation. The Caretaker government established under this amendment has nothing to do with this type of 'extra-ordinary emergency'. The 'act of god like situation' has been recognised in the Constitution through the Constitution (12th Amendment) Act, 1991 with limited application.

If, in the opinion of the Chief Election Commissioner, it is not possible, for reasons of an act of god, to hold an election to fill the seat of Parliament which falls vacant otherwise than by reason of the dissolution of Parliament within the period of ninety days, such election, according to article 123(4) shall be held within ninety days following next after the last day of previous period. The provision applies to the case of by-election only. Clearly only the Election Commission can decide whether a particular situation amounts to "acts of god".

5.3. The election commission in the non-party caretaker government regime: The preamble of the Constitution of Bangladesh chooses 'high ideals of democracy' as one of the fundamental principles of the Constitution. Later in article 11, the People's Republic of Bangladesh has been declared as a "democracy", where among others, "effective participation by the people through their elected representatives in administrations at all levels" would be ensured.

Democracy is based on the existence of well-structured and well-functioning institutions, as well as on a body of standards and rules and on the will of society as a whole, fully conversant with its rights and responsibilities. Undoubtedly the Election Commission is one of the most important constitutional institutions with a wide mandate of conducting local and national elections. The 13th Amendment to the Constitution provides for a unique constitutional arrangement in Bangladesh whereby a Non-Party technocrat Government will take over the state power from an elected government for a period of not more than 90 days.

And the purpose is to assist the Election Commission for holding a peaceful, free and fair

general election of members of parliament. It is interesting to observe some of the dynamics of such temporary election arrangement and its impact on the role of Election Commission.

5.4. Election and democracy: Mere holding of periodic election is not enough for democracy, although the election is one of the principal means to achieve participatory democracy. The other criteria for democracy are * A robust opposition party, * Freedom of press, * Rule of law, * Good governance, * Respect for human rights, and * Equitable distribution of national wealth.

One can reasonably acknowledge that the 1991, 1996 and 2001 elected governments had not adhered to the above criteria of participatory democracy. The governments are characterized by a persistent tendency for leaders to disregard the necessity and relevance of morality in their actions and conduct.

No ruling party had implemented what they had promised in their manifestoes. The public had been disappointed and felt helpless, when ruling parties, one after another, calmly reneged on their election commitments without any explanation to the public. The accumulated mess of 16 years cannot be removed easily and quickly by the CTG. 5.5. Why Caretaker Government Where There is Election Commission: The Election Commission which is the fourth organ of the state as invisaged in the Constitution is a constitutionally independent body to control and conduct election process.

Administering election process through an independent Election Commission is recognized in many democratic countries. As to the independence of the Election Commission the following provisions have been provided for in the Constitution:

(i) The Election Commission shall be independent in the exercise of its functions and subject only to this Constitution and any other law. (ii) An Election Commissioner shall not be removed from his office except in like manner and on the like grounds as a judge of the Supreme Court. (iii) The President shall, when so requested by the Election Commission, make available to it such staff as may be necessary for the discharge of its functions. (iv) The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for elections to the office of President and to parliament and the conduct of such elections shall vest in the Election Commission. (v) It shall be the duty of all executive authorities to assist the Election Commission in the discharge of its functions.

Thus the Constitutional independence of the Election Commission has been ensured but the problem lies with the statutory-independence; various laws, which regulate the Election Commission and electoral process, are vitiating this constitutional independence.

Firstly, according to the Rules of Business the Election Commission Secretariat is attached to the Prime Minister's Secretariat. As a result, the Chief Election Commission cannot exercise his effective control over the Secretariat of the Election Commission.

Secondly, it is a conventional and somewhere constitutional ml. that Election

Commission

are

appointed

m consultation

with

the

members Chief

of the Election

Commissioner. But that condition of appointment has neither been inserted in the Constitution nor does it exist in convention in Bangladesh politics.

Thirdly, though the security of tenure of the Commissioners of the Commission is as like as that of the judges of the Supreme Court and although article 119 of the Constitution has invested the Election Commission all control and superintendence over election process, UKCommission has little statutory independence to control election process independently and effectively. As expressed by an ex-Chic I Election Commissioner the scheme under the Representation of the People Order, 1972 is that the Election Commission shall simply arrange the election; and the real control will remain at the hand of the Returning Officers.

Under section 39 of the Representation of the People Order, 1972 the principal function of

pronouncing election results of parliamentary election is done by the Returning Officers who are the Deputy Commissioners of different districts.

Fourthly, in every district there is an Election Officer known as District Election Officer (DEO) who is under the direct control of the Election Commission. But by law this DEO has been made subordinate to executive officers. Most of the logistics required to be used in the polls—general elections or elections of the local bodies— are controlled by the Deputy Commissioners (DC). Besides, the DCs enjoy the power of magistracy which is every important for conducting polls. On the other hand, the status of the District Election Officer is lower than that of Thana Nirbahi Officer (TNO) and the former controls no logistics in the district.

Fifthly, to get redress of violation of election laws and irregularities there is provision for Election Tribunal as envisaged in the Representation of the People Order, 1972. In this tribunal a 0candidate through an election petition can call an election in question. But the procrastination of the proceedings of the tribunal vitiates all its pious purposes. In most cases petitions are not decided till the parliament is dissolved or ends its term thus frustrating all the rights of the petitioner. In this connection it is important to mention that till 24th November, 1995, 194 election petitions were filed out of which only 26 petitions were decided and that too very lately. The following table will make the position clear: Parliament

No.

of

Election

Petition Decided

Petitions First

4

Nill

March 3, 1973 to August 15. 1975 Second

40

3

February 18, 1979 to March 24, 1982 Third

106

3

May 7, 1986 to December 6, 1987 Fourth

13

1

March 3, 1988 to December 6, 1990 Fifth

31

19

February 27, 1991 to November 24, 1995 Sixth

unavailable

unavailable

19 March, 1996 to 25 March, 1996 Seventh

unavailable

unavailable

14 July, 1996 to 13 July, 2001

Eighth

31

13

28 October, 2001 Sixthly, the workload of the Election Commission has been another threat to its discharging functions effectively. Though under the Constitution the primary function of the Election Commission is to control the parliamentary elections and to "arrange for electoral rolls and demarcation of constituencies etc. a gigantic burden of holding local bodies election has been put on the shoulder of Election Commission. The Commission is engaged with abnormal load of 50 thousands elective

offices

of the local

bodies.

No Election Commission in

South Asian countries like India and Sri Lanka has been vested with this sort of burden for running local bodies elections. These are the legal and institutional short comings which have made

the

whole

institution, of Election

Commission

weak

in administering

and

controlling the electoral process. And these shortcomings have lastly paved the way for the caretaker government.

5.6. General election and non-party caretaker government: Two issues that have been lately raised by some political parties are: * How long can the non-party care-taker government (CTG) continue when the constitution says that an elected that government ought to run the country? * It is desirable that the Election Commission should announce a specific date for holding the general election by June.

It appears that the chief adviser had dealt with the two issues by making a simple statement earlier, that it was not possible to give a specific timeframe for elections as reforms were still being carried out for free, fair and credible polls (DS/February 28).

He added that the government was determined to hold election "as soon as possible" after necessary reforms. Furthermore, a poll in a widely circulated Bangla daily revealed on March 2 that more than 98% percent do not support the holding of election by June.

Before I discuss the above two issues regarding holding elections, let me provide some general remarks in the context of which the two issues need to be considered.

5.7. Constitutional pre-conditions of general election: Let me consider now the two specific issues raised at the beginning in the light of the functions of the CTG as per Constitution.

Among other functions, one core function of the CTG has been specified in Article 58D (2) of the Constitution in the context of the national election.

For ready reference, the Article is quoted below: " 58D (2): The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall give to the Election Commission all possible aid and assistance that may be required for holding the general election of members of parliament peacefully, fairly and impartially."

Let us examine carefully the language used in this Article. There are four elements in it, and they are: * All possible aid and assistance to the Election Commission that are required to hold a peaceful, fair and impartial election, * The words used "peacefully, fairly and impartially" are pre-conditions to holding an election, * Until an environment of peace, fair and impartiality is created, the Election Commission cannot hold an election and * An election without satisfying these criteria is not an election within the meaning of the constitution.

The much-publicized link between certain politicians and criminal gangs must be unearthed and dismantled. Obviously it takes time to eradicate what has been built in, and tolerated for, at least 16 years.

Fair is a moral and perceptive concept. It means that fairness of an action must be perceived by every one. Fair implies action without discrimination, without bias and without prejudice.

Impartial means absence of partisanship. Partiality includes nepotism, favoritism and bias. In this term what is important is the perception of impartiality. This means that no one should suffer for a decision that has been tainted by partiality or bias.Both the concepts of fairness and impartiality involve behavior and conduct of persons entrusted with a duty or task. This means that the officials who are connected directly and indirectly with the election process

(such as district and upazilla administrators and police officers) need to be in place, removing partisan ones.

It is argued that this onerous responsibility of creating a peaceful, fair and impartial environment for election means; * Reconstitution of the Election Commission, * De-politicisation of the administration, including state law officers at all levels * Preparation of correct voters list with either photo or ID cards, and * Amendment of the P.R. Order 1972 that will deal with empowerment of the Election Commission and criteria for ineligibility of candidates.

All the above issues are inter-related, and cannot be separated from each other. It is argued that mere re-constitution of the Election Commission and reshuffling of some public servants are not enough for holding a fair election in terms of the Constitution.

5.8. Tenure of CTG: With regard to the second issue on how long the CTG can continue, the Constitution provides the answer. Article 58 B (1) states that the tenure of the CTG expires on the "date on which a new prime minister enters upon his office after the constitution of Parliament." This means, first, the constitution of the ninth Parliament through elections and, secondly, when the majority of MPs elect their leader as prime minister.

The CTG was installed in office under Article 58C (5) of the Constitution. The Article empowers the president, under certain circumstances, to appoint the chief adviser "from among the citizens," after consultation (not agreement), as far as practicable, with the major parties.

It has been argued that it is not mandatory to consult the major parties for appointment because the phrase "as far as practicable" qualifies the nature and act of consultation. The phrase "as far as practicable" must be given its full meaning and interpretation, otherwise the framers would not have inserted this phrase after the word "consultation" in Article 58C (5).

It is noted that the chief adviser was appointed during a grave national crisis which warranted the promulgation of emergency (Article 141 A of the Constitution), and the president deemed it not practicable to consult the major parties at the time of appointing the chief adviser, and such decision is perfectly legal within the ambit of the Constitution.

5.9. Power and authority of EC and role of CTG: Much of the present problem that has inflicted us and is perceived as a national crisis, originates from misconception and misinterpretation of the real situation. To overcome the present deadlock, we need to take a hard look at the crux of the problem.

Would first of all like to make a distinction between a problem and crises. In my opinion, a situation gives rise to a crisis only when it is beyond comprehension and control and of which no rational solution appears to exist. A situation which is not beyond solution and there exists rational methods to overcome it, however hard that may be, is to be designated as a problem rather than a crisis. Let me, therefore, begin by indicating that many aspects of the present situation are wrongly or intentionally painted as negative and sheer hopeless, which, in fact, are positive expression of democratic spirit.

Common people may not have the direct access to power but the embodiment of their power and the right to reflect their will and their judgement is to be sought in the general election.

Election is a transient phenomenon but its effect is long lasting. It is like a Big Bang in the creation of the universe.

Democracy , in opinion, is like a growing tree. It has its inner dead wood in its trunk as it has its components as also its flexible, growing, and living bark, branches and leaves. The dead wood of the trunk is important to keep the tree standing but it is the living, dynamic leaves and branches of the tree which connect it with the outer world through exchange of energy and the chemical elements as food for growth. It has always been the practice in that past that the government in power conducted the election who were elected through partisanship.

However, it is very unfortunate that the unfair practices of the past government snatched away the faith of the people in the conventional electoral process. It was under such circumstances that the concept of care taker government came into existence. The caretaker government is thus a result of the loss of confidence in the government, the responsibility of which lies entirely with the government in question which through their foul play shattered the old system of election.

Caretaker government is an invention to counter the foul play of the party in power.

Naturally, the emergence of the concept of caretaker government carries with it the bad

memory of that past government who destroyed the confidence in the government. It is to be remembered and comprehended that the independence, the authority, and the power that were vested in the election commission during the period when party in power conducted the election was guided by the principle that the government should have as less freedom as possible in the affairs of conducting the election. But with the failure of the past party based government to hold a fair election in spite of all the constitutional rights and privileges given to the election commission, it was proved that election commission just like the government, lost the confidence of the voters in respect in their ability to conduct a free and fair election.

The emergence of the caretaker government, therefore, has its origin in the total lack of confidence in the system as a whole. The important point to note is that the constitutional power and independence given to the election commission when the election used to be carried out under the party based government is no longer tenable. Talking about the spirit and the principle of the caretaker government which is solely intended to ensure a free and fair election. The caretaker government is assumed to be much more free of party influence than even the election commission which stands the possibility of being influenced or engineered by the party in power that selected them.

Another important point to note is that the chief adviser of the caretaker government should not think of himself as a prime minister democratically elected. Neither should he choose the other advisers, in fact, all the advisers are equally responsible in representing the general public to ensure free and fair election. It is not the task of the caretaker government to only help the election commission as often is claimed by some members of some political parties.

The caretaker government also have the freedom to scrutinize, on behalf of the people, the performance of the last government because they are likely to be most unbiased. This is a vantage point to look at things and act in quite a different way than a party government because the caretaker government belongs to all or to none. There is always a risk or a possibility that if the party that was in power is reelected will overlook all the mistakes and misdeeds of the last tenure. On the other hand, if the opposition comes back to power they might victimise the opposition or be blamed of doing so.

Constitution is not to be used as a shield for the protection of jobs of some officials whose task was to protect the democratic right of the people to express their wills through voting but have failed to do so by bad intention or inefficiency. Preserving the jobs of such people

occupying so called constitutional posts is not the purpose of the constitution but to uphold the whole democratic system with its functionality and spirit.

People have not leased their democratic rights to any one, not to the election commission, nor to the caretaker government. In fact, there is no proxying in democracy, no discontinuity in its temporal flow, and therefore, no one for a moment can snatch away the rights of the people and captivate them, so long they maintain the courage to oppose.

Bangladesh, in that sense, is not in a bad shape but is rather boiling with the spirit of democratic demand. One may try to denounce it as chaos but it is in a creative chaotic environment that innovations take place. When water boils, it transforms into vapour from its whole body. It is a cooperative phenomenon, a phase of transition -- not to be mistaken as mere disorder.

Their indifference, when compared with the sacrifice of our people for a free and fair election makes me optimistic, and one can surely see that this country is more prepared for democracy now than ever before and more ready than many other countries. To appreciate this, we have to remember that democracy is possible only when people have capacity for justice and value it above personal and selfish ends. And also democracy is necessary because individuals, however high in their social position, have inclination for injustice and cannot be relied upon, leaving the people behind.

5.10. Urgency for an independent election commission secretariat Article 118(4) of the Constitution dictates that the Election Commission is independent in the exercise of its functions and subject only to the Constitution and any other law. The provision has not yet been implemented. In fact the issue of an independent Election Commission has become a political rhetoric. After thirty years of independence, the Election Commission is still dependent on other ministries including Ministry of Establishment and the Prime Minister's Secretariat for any vital appointment.

The posts of Election Commission Secretary, Additional Secretary and Joint Secretary are routinely filled up routinely according to the dictates of the Prime Minister's Secretariat even without any consultation with the Chief Election Commissioner. Recently the Parliament enacted the Upazila Parishad (Amendment) Act 2001, which abruptly took away the power of

the Election Commission to fix a date for the Upazila Parishad Election. The Prime Minister ignored the repeated pleas of the Chief Election Commissioner against such attempt.

The Election Commission remains functional at local level and plays important role including selecting venues for poling stations, preparing electoral rolls through the District Election Officers (DEOs). Frequently the DEOs have to face severe pressure by the local ruling party stalwarts, sitting MPs and ministers. They are dictated to select some particular place as poling centres according to the convenience of those elements. This unfortunate trend of harassing the DEOs intensifies in the period prior to elections. Sometimes the DEOs are threatened with dire consequences including physical assault if they do not obey the directives of the political goons. This is, indeed, a grave situation, which the Election Commission miserably fails to resist. The Election Commission must empower the DEOs with adequate logistics and administrative sanction to overcome this ground reality.

Under the changed arrangement of Caretaker Government, the Election Commission will have more influence and dominance over the state of governance of the country. The Chief Election Commissioner should take the opportunity to create an enabling environment for holding a free and fair election. During the Caretaker regime, the Election Commission virtually turns into the principal constitutional agency of the state with specific constitutional sanction. The Caretaker Government is constitutionally duty bound to provide all possible aid and assistance in the interest of a credible election and such functions will not be deemed as 'policy decision' as propagated by a vested quarter. The future Caretaker Government should take necessary steps to make the Election Commission Secretariat independent and effective.

5.11. The Caretaker Government and the Independence of the Election Commission.

The caretaker government as provided for by the 1 Amendment has paved the way of making only general elections live and fair. But the question of ensuring free and fair atmosphere for other elections like parliamentary by-election, city corporation election, local bodies election etc are still unsettled.

Secondly, though provisions for caretaker government has been introduced with a view to ensuring free and fair general election, still there are some drawbacks which will hamper free and fair election. The unchecked power given to the Returning Officers under the

Representation of the People Order, 1972 will still be abused by them sometimes for their personal interest and sometimes for their allegiance to any political party. Question was raised even during the first caretaker government as to the impartiality of the Returning Officers. Returning Officers have been given wide and unchecked powers in selecting and accepting nomination papers, counting votes, controlling polling stations and announcing results and in case of irregularities or partialities by them the Election Commission has not been given any independent power to inflict immediate punishment or other appropriate measures against them. Till such will not be given to the Election Commission there will be no assurance of free and fair election.

Analysis from broader perspective will give the idea that there is no alternative of making the Election Commission fully independent; the flaws and defects of the election laws should be corrected and the Election Commission should be invested with full authority to announce and conduct the elections. The post of District Election Officers should immediately be upgraded so that they can gradually take the lead at the district level in conducting polls.

5.12. Key Findings and Analyses: A total number of 122 candidates conducted election campaigns in 38 constituencies.

These candidates started their campaign prior to the declaration of election schedule. Among them 61 (50%) were from Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), and 42 (34.4%) were from Bangladesh Awami League (AL), while others were from Jamaat-e-Islami, Jatiya Party (Ershad) and Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). Most of these candidates started their campaign three months prior to the election schedule declaration. Up to the last date of withdrawal of nomination (3 January 2007), these 122 candidates spent a total amount of Tk 18 crore 55 lac 45 thousand 350. Accordingly each candidate spent more than Tk 15 lac 20 thousand on an average. In these constituencies, 15 candidates of AL(35.7%) and 31 candidates of BNP (50.8%) spent more than Tk 5 lac each, which is the maximum amount one candidate is allowed to spend according to law.

Major heads of such expenditure included organising rallies and processions, establishing and maintaining election camps, expenses for workers and transportation. For these activities, on an average over Tk 5 lac was spent by the candidates.

A total amount of Tk 11 crore 40 lac 32 thousand 950 (Tk 18 lac 69 thousand 393 on an average) was spent by the 61 BNP candidates, whereas Tk 5 crore 86 lac 28 thousand 300 (Tk 13 lac 95 thousand 911 on average) was spent by 42 AL candidates. Among the BNP candidates, the highest amount spent by one candidate was Tk one crore 94 lac 9 thousand, while the highest amount spent by an AL candidate was Tk one crore 67 lac 8 thousand 500.

Among these 122 candidates, all the candidates from leading political parties violated electoral code of conduct. Most of them spent on printing four-colour posters (59%), graffiti (60%), using microphones more than the allowed number (53%), erecting gates (24%), motor-cycle rally (21%) and car/truck rally (5%), which are directly violation of the electoral code of conduct.

5.13. Role of Stakeholders: For violation of similar codes of conduct, there are inconsistencies in imposing penalties in the Representation of the People Order, 1972 and the Electoral Code of Conduct, 1996. The role of the EC in this regard is also not clear. The EC is given the sole responsibility of holding a free and fair election. However, the EC alone cannot fulfil this duty. In the process of conducting elections there are different stakeholders that include the non-party caretaker government, political parties, candidates, development partners, local and national level civil society, election observation organizations, the media and common people.

The EC as an independent constitutional body cannot implement the electoral code of conduct and other election-related laws properly. The election expenditure of all the candidates exceeds the maximum limit of Tk Five lac, but the EC did not take any action against them. No effective mechanism has been developed by the EC to monitor and investigate on the election expenditure incurred by the candidate.

Black money owners, businessmen, industrialists, terrorists were nominated as candidates by almost all political parties. However, they do not show any respect to the electoral laws. The candidates do not get any warning from their respective parties to refrain from violations of the code of conduct. The topmost leaders do not take action against such violations because they also violate the rules and regulations. The political leaders do not practice intra-party democracy and even they do not want to be accountable to the people. For this the political parties are not eager to register with the EC.

A large portion of the civil society is involved to the donor-funded NGOs. These organizations also do not have any research or investigation scheme on the expenditure of election campaigning. Although concerns are regularly raised from different segments of the civil society for political and electoral reforms, any long-term activities to stop such irregularities are not observed. A number of satellite television channels under private ownership started broadcasting programmes in the last five years. It is evident that some of them broadcast news have political indulgence. News and reports covering election mainly focus on political party and leaders, party-hopping, voter perspectives, political activities, election campaigning by candidates, the EC, role of CG to conduct election and so on.

However, how the candidates violate electoral rules and regulations, how much they spent for campaigning, from where they get such huge amount of money, and how they influence the people are not investigated and focused in the media.

5.14. Recommendations: 1. Action should be taken to observe and investigate incidences of violations of electoral conduct rules and maximum limit of expenditure for campaigning by the candidates. A committee may be formed with Deputy Commissioners and Upazila Nirbahi Officer (who will become Returning Officer and Assistant Returning Officer respectively during election) of respective constituencies, tax officials, District and Upazila Election Officers, local journalists and locally accepted persons.

2. This Committee may initiate its observation one year prior to the election and send monthly reports to the EC, on the basis of which the EC will take necessary step. The same reports must be published locally and nationally.

3. The names of loan defaulters and those who whitened black money last year among the expected candidates along with the amount of whitened money must be made public.

4. The Representation of the People Order, 1972 and Electoral Code of Conduct, 1996 must be amended to facilitate stern action against those who start campaign before the declaration of election schedule. To do this, a panel comprising of electoral law experts may be constituted.

5. The High Court Order for disclosure of personal information including income and expenditure of the candidates must be made obligatory and included as a law through a Presidential Order.

6. Registration of the political parties must be made obligatory.

7. A Task Force consisting of civil society members who have been advocating for political and electoral reforms may be formed. The CG will have the responsibility to implement the recommendations proposed by this Task Force.

8. It is essential for the mass media to focus on the amount spent for campaigning by the candidates during election. For this the correspondent of the electronic and print media should increase investigative reporting. The media should play the role of making people aware through focusing on how laws are violated by the candidates.

9. Controlling election expenditure by the candidate and preventing violation of electoral laws must be ensured in the electoral process. Development partners should take steps in providing research-based information to the government, EC and the CG apart from funding excessively for Election Day monitoring.

10. The civil society organizations working on election activities should be vocal against the violation of electoral codes of conduct by the candidates. They should also initiate various activities for mass awareness.

CHAPTER-SIX Necessity of the Caretaker Government International community too welcomes action against corruption. The United States wants to see election in Bangladesh as soon as possible in an appropriate way according to the constitution and rule of law. But Washington also wants "to make sure that there is accountability in government, that corruption and any other illegal activities are managed. At the same time it is strongly opposed to the military takeover of the government and would like to see the charging and prosecution of the detainees in a manner consistent with Bangladesh's laws and international standards of due process. The US has also offered its help to Bangladesh in fighting corruption. European Union (EU) Ambassador to Bangladesh Stefan Forewing has stated that the international community supports the government's crackdown on corrupt politicians, terming the recent arrests the "right thing" to do. Envoys of the Asean countries have praised the caretaker government's efforts to establish a role model for the future government in Bangladesh. Similar sentiments have been expressed by the development agencies like the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

In the parlance of institutional government of Bangladesh, a caretaker government is one which is supposed to take care of state administration for an interim period until the regular

new government is formed. In an established parliamentary system, there is a convention of transformation of the outgoing government into a caretaker government for the time being before the holding of the general election. Such temporary government is supposed to only perform day-to-day administrative jobs, and not with policy initiating functions which may influence the election results. During this period the caretaker government is supposed to maintain a neutral status for ensuring free and fair general elections. Of course, this is what it is "supposed" to do. In reality the real balance of forces between the contending parties leads to a different situation.

6.1. Evaluation of the 13th Amendment: In the constitutional development of Bangladesh the 13th Amendment of the constitution may be said to be a positive step for following reasons: Firstly the fundamental basis of formation of government in democracy is election. If this election is not free and, the formation of government cannot be said to fulfill the norms of democracy; and in this case the most celebrated maxim of democracy “all power belong to the people “ becomes a mere farce. More the election process will be free and fair, more the people see their voting right, in the words, right to elect representatives meaningful. The most important positive merit of the 13th Amendment is that it has paved the way for making the general elections free and fair, particularly free from government influence.

Secondly, it has been a common trend in the politics of almost all developing countries that during the election period the party in power makes the worst abuse of public purse and properties to get the victory in their favour. This manipulation in the election process virtually creates an insurmountable stumbling block to the development of some important democratic institutions like the Election Commission, voting right, press, media and political party etc. Since the 13th Amendment provides interim separate caretaker government and no party government can continue in power during the general election, there remains no scope of manipulation of public purse and properties by the party in power.

Thirdly, coming to power every government from now on will have to think that once parliament is dissolved or its term is ended, it will automatically find itself out of the power and then the public will have the fullest opportunity and atmosphere to exercise their right to elect representatives and of the government. On the other hand, no government will be in a position to think for manipulating in the election process. There is therefore, possibility that the government will now be more responsive than in the past

6.2. Bangladesh and the crisis over the Caretaker Government:

On the surface, the conflict that has erupted in Bangladesh is over the make-up of the caretaker government that according to the constitution is supposed to run the country in the three months up to a general election. The conflict apparently is between two bourgeois fronts. But underlying this political crisis is the extreme poverty of the masses who have reached the limits of human endurance.

The immediate issue that sparked off the present political crisis in Bangladesh was the conflict over the choice of the head of the caretaker authority to supervise the elections. After Bangladesh returned to so called democracy in 1991 following years of military rule, the two main political parties had agreed that the incumbent party would step down three months before every election and allow a "neutral" caretaker government to run the country and oversee the election commission until a new government was elected and sworn in. The immediate cause of the present unrest is one of the few things that the two main political parties, indeed the two women leaders, had ever agreed on since 1991.

To be more accurate, the women in question are more than mere prima ballerinas. They are the rival former Prime Ministers of the country, who despise each other and whose political organizations - complete with congenital corruption and violent tendencies - have been obstacles to any kind of genuine progress in Bangladesh for the past decade and a half.

Khaleda Zia, 61, heads the Bangladesh National Party (BNP) and is the widow of assassinated President Ziaur Rahman; and Sheikh Hasina, 59, leads the Awami League and is the daughter of Bangladesh's first President, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.

This time, the Awami League accused the BNP of stacking the caretaker government and the electoral commission with partisans prior to standing down. Former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina announced earlier this month that therefore her coalition would boycott the poll and called for her supporters to "oppose" the "biased" elections. Bitter rival Khaleda Zia, who was prime minister until last October when she and her government stood down for the agreed-upon caretaker body to take over ahead of the election, insisted the poll should take place no matter what.

6.3. Credits to the CTG Government:

Many argue that the huge acceptance and success of current CTG government and the imposed state of emergency period is the result of the failure and betrayal of the autocratic and dynastic rules that prevailed in the country over the last two decades. That maybe partly true but we are miserably failing to acknowledge the good things they have done in what is now their third month in the top seat. Very few will argue that the last three general elections were not fare; at least as fare as they can be in a rather young and developing third world nation. The democratically elected governments could not do much in years in the office to tackle one of the biggest problems of the nation - corruption. In fact, it turned out that the epicenter of corruption was within the governments that were entrusted by the citizens. The CTG government in the state of emergency has done significant work in just three months in the office to curb corruption. A rather daring and “never seen before” action in our country or to that matter in the region where corruption is so ubiquitous.

Many quite naturally started questioning about the length the CTG government intends to stay in the office without realizing the task on hand. The CTG earlier made it clear that it doesn’t intend to stay in the office a day longer than needed. This week Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed on behalf of the CTG announced that the election will be held by no later than end of 2008 and laid out the roadmap of the tasks that need to be completed before the election. Lots of good things have happened in three months for which the CTG deserves huge credit and I am sure some bad things have happened too but an army backed government will always be a double edged sword. We just will have to hope that the benefits of it will be outnumbered by the shortfalls for the greater long-term interest.

6.4. Reflections on the Bangladeshi National and Local Elections: On December 29, 2008, Bangladesh held its most credible and most peaceful elections to date. They were free, fair, and without the usual violence and disruption that has accompanied most elections in Bangladesh. Voter turnout hit 88 percent, a remarkable figure for a country with a history, albeit interrupted, of regular elections.

These elections differed from years past. Both the orderly management of the elections and a belief that a new style of politics was being ushered-in in Bangladesh gave the public a renewed sense of confidence in government. The run-up to the cancelled January 2007 elections was marred by street violence and accusations of manipulation of the voter list. In

February 2007, the new members of the Bangladesh Election Commission (BEC) worked tirelessly to ensure that the December 2008 elections would be a success, and faced few of the criticisms and complaints brought against its predecessors.

In a remarkable display of organizational mobilization and determination, the BEC worked with the military to gather data from every household in the country to produce a new electoral roll. When finished, it contained photographic identification of all 81 million registered voters. It also had 12 million voters less than the dubious electoral roll the previous BEC had planned to use in January 2007.

While the BEC spent 18 months preparing for the election, the Caretaker Government attempted to clean up Bangladesh’s political system. Joining several prominent members of parliament in prison, former Prime Ministers Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina, alternating in power since 1991, were detained and held while awaiting trial on corruption charges. With the exception of the two leaders, most high profile arrests were greeted with the public’s enthusiasm. However, the Caretaker Government and courts ultimately floundered in their efforts to marshal sufficient evidence to support most corruption charges.

The drive to clean up Bangladeshi politics created popular pressure for the political parties to pick candidates untainted by allegations of a criminal nature to run for the 300 parliamentary constituencies up for election. The BEC created new laws and regulations to tighten who was qualified to stand for election. Many nominated potential candidates who were rejected by the BEC, however, went on to appeal their candidacy to the courts, which – much to the dismay of the BEC – were granted the opportunity to run. Still, the Bangladeshi tradition of violence during elections was absent. The new election laws banned subversive campaign tactics, including mass rallies and road blocks, and the government was clear that it would enforce these regulations firmly.

The Bangladeshi media and civil society drove a nationwide voter education effort to ensure that citizens knew their rights. Women faced particularly strong pressure to vote according to the wishes of their husbands or fathers. Organizations such as the Election Working Group (EWG), a coalition of 32 organizations, produced publications and a series of four televised public service announcements that clearly explained and promoted issues such as: a woman’s

right to vote according to her own choice, why the elections are important, and the meaning of the new buzz word “accountability.”

In a survey conducted by the EWG, over 86 percent of respondents thought that the prevailing law and order situation in their area was conducive to a free and fair election. In a similar survey conducted prior to the cancelled 2007 elections, just 56 percent of respondents were confident the upcoming Parliamentary election would be free and fair.

Surprisingly, however, the euphoria and unity shown during the December 2008 parliamentary elections was not evident one month later during the January 22 upazila (midlevel local government) elections. These elections were marked by much higher levels of violence, which led to the closing of several polling centers. Also, violations including ballot snatching and intimidation of polling officials ensured that the quality of the elections fell far short of the new standard set by the parliamentary election three weeks earlier. There are many possible reasons why voter turnout was low. The upazila elections were to elect a newly re-instated tier of government upazila councils having been previously abolished in 1991. Few Bangladeshis seemed to understand the upazila elections’ importance.

After the election, the BEC accused the newly installed political government of not paying enough attention to upazila elections, and other state bodies such as the police and military for a lack of willingness to coordinate their activities for the elections. Now that Bangladesh has shown it can hold fair elections, it is the duty of the current government to work towards creating an environment conducive for future elections. Expectations should remain high that elections can continue to be held in a safe environment; one in which the electorate has confidence that the results reflect the will of the people.

Similarly, Bangladesh’s public and civil society has a great challenge ahead to continue to engage the public to promote accountability amongst elected officials and to make sure that knowledge, awareness, and enthusiasm for democratic politics does not diminish. If this does not happen, the efforts of the current BEC will have been sacrificed to political opportunism and disinterest.

6.5. Bangladesh Democracy:

Vote in recent Bangladesh national election, still would spare no pain in proudly saluting 160 million people of this impoverished nation and gladly accepting their mandate!

Not to congratulate Awami League leadership (especially Hasina) and her nascent "uncommon" cabinet would indeed be an indignity to nation's verdict that awarded an excellent opportunity and also challenging responsibilities those have been chasing their luck for long 7 years. The nation now expects and hopes that the new Government shall be tenacious in taking stalwart move by maintaining positive focus and refurbishing Bangladesh during next 5 years.

However, no one should quarrel with and disparage the glorious "final delivery" of this "Illegitimate and unconstitutional" Care Taker Government as well as of an "ambitious" Army General (Mohiuddin). What exactly happened to last "2 year-long crusades" against corruptions, minus 2, ACC's crime hunts, Dr. Yunus politics, mass arrest, VIP prisoners, releases .. are still a big question mark but not of any big mystery! Kind "donor nations" do neither like endemic corruptions nor a "Black-Hole-Vacuum" in Bangladesh national politics along with our all time "good and friendly" neighbor India's diplomatic chess game have produced a "damage controlled equation" satisfying our political leaders, Care Taker Government and the Army. However, Bangladesh should never mess up with this 10,000pound friendly gorilla neighbor that could make it (Bangladesh) another Palestine (terrorist state) to India forever.

As the nation has spoken, now it's the politician's (AL) call "to deliver" to this nation during next 5 years; reminisce and practice the exact lessons they have learnt from last 2 years of State of Emergency. "Free and fair" election must not be the end of the game, instead be the beginning of a "Free and Fair Democracy" and "Politics of Actions, not Speeches" with accountability and transparency". Hasina now has the supreme mandate and if she CHANGES her mind, practice honesty; surely positive CHANGES could come up under her tutelage. Meanwhile, the "booted BNP" must leave ignominious waters under the bridge and should start cleaning "stolen meats" stuck between their teeth. As for General Ershad, he may start counting another 5X365 days to become next Bangladesh President and "foreclosed JAMAT" could consider a long vacation to the south without any fear of trials (as war criminals) in near future. The noises and demands of trials of war criminals shall die down soon and shall remain "on hold" until before the next general election in year 2013. Fooling

around with this poor nation on "trials" of war criminals shall continue for another 99 years or until remaining war criminals, their children and grandchildren leave this planet.

Finally, we are one of the few democracies among the Muslim countries despite chronic problems with dysfunctional political system, weak governance and fettered by pervasive corruptions. 160 Million People regard democracy as an important denouement, legacy of our bloods and spirits of freedom. We participate in all election process in large numbers. But the concept, understanding and practice of democracy in my beloved motherland are most always shallow. We intuitively understand democracy as a system of individual liberty; one free of authoritarian controls and restraints on our individual liberty; one with opportunity for all.

While we envision this system, we fail to recognize the importance of enforcing the public accountability and transparency of politician's/Government conducts and behavior before voicing our tendentious predilection for democracy. This is our only bone of contention here.

6.6. What is a Caretaker Government supposed to do?

The main problem was the choice of the head of the caretaker authority to supervise the election. Khaleda's Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) wanted former chief justice K.M. Hasan in the post of caretaker chief, but the opposition Awami League led by Sheikh Hasina opposed him on the ground of his earlier associations with the ruling party. The other main dispute was over the opposition's demand for the removal of the chief election commissioner M.A. Aziz and his deputies, who are accused of having a pro-BNP bias.

A significant development took place on the eve of transfer of power to the interim authority in Bangladesh. The earlier chief advisor designates, former chief justice KM Hasan refused to accept the responsibility in view of the widespread violence in the country. The president of Bangladesh received the letter from Justice KM Hasan declining the job offer on October 27, 2006. After this the president held a meeting with BNP Secretary General Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan and Awami League General Secretary Abdul Jalil and offered himself as the chief adviser.

Following this, President Iajuddin Ahmed on October 29 assumed the office of chief adviser to the non-party caretaker government in addition to his presidential responsibilities.

However in November 2006, after an emergency meeting with the 14-party leaders at her

residence in the capital, Awami League (AL) President Sheikh Hasina said that "there is certainly a question about the neutrality of the president" and wanted him removed from the post of chief adviser of the caretaker government.

As the political crisis deepened, the Bangladeshi President Iajuddin Ahmed declared a state of emergency on January 12, 2007 and resigned as head of the interim caretaker government that was to serve in the period leading up to the elections. He will however, remain as President. He has also delayed the elections from 22 January to an unspecified date.

The new head of the caretaker government will be Fakhruddin Ahmed, a former governor of the nation's central bank. This little fact shows what the "impartiality" of the caretakers government really means. He is a direct representative of finance capital and therefore belongs to the ruling elite, the ruling class. His "impartiality" cannot bridge the gap between the classes! His nomination is based on a consensus between the two major political coalitions - both bourgeois coalitions and his task will be to begin the reconstitution of the interim government. The president will now appoint ten advisers within a day or two, consulting with the newly appointed Chief Adviser to complete the reconstitution of the council of advisers to the caretaker government that will initiate a fresh move for holding the next parliamentary election.

6.7. The Economic Situation: As we can see, desperate attempts have been made to patch up the crisis. The conflict between the mainstream parties has spilled onto the streets, a very dangerous development from the point of view of the ruling elite. Now, although some agreement has been reached, the political crisis is far from over. The political crisis is merely an expression of the terrible economic impasse the country is in. The next step depends on how the BNP will take on this new situation in the coming days.

The fact is that none of these parties care for the poor workers and the downtrodden. The economic situation has gone from bad to worse since the political crisis started last year. The serious transport blockades, general strikes and suspension of operations of Chittagong port are an indication of the anger of the masses, who are demanding something be done for them.

Bangladesh is in fact one of the poorest countries in the world. The gross domestic product (GDP) of the country in 2000 was estimated at 48 billion dollars at 1995 prices. Compare this GDP figure with Bill Gates' personal current assets of 40 billion dollars! The wealth of one

man is almost equal to that of a nation of over one million. Over the period 1949-50 to 197677, the growth in real per capita income in Bangladesh was not much above zero. The annual rate of growth in GDP was 2.7 percent over this period compared to a rate of population growth of 2.6%, thus hardly moving per capita.

The following empirical data are sufficient to give an idea of the real situation: 33% of households in rural Bangladesh are landless and another 15% own less than half an acre of agricultural land which is far less than subsistence requirements. The proportion of landless households in rural areas increased from an estimated 18% in 1961 to 33% in 1977; this during a period of consistent agricultural growth. By 1989, fifty million people in Bangladesh almost half of the then 111 million population fell into the category of the rural landless poor. Owning less than 0.5 of an acre of land, and many none at all, they are the people who most often face the greatest difficulty in surviving and in rising above total poverty. The majority of the rural landless live, at best, in small shelters built, typically, with a bamboo frame, jute or bamboo walls and a thatched roof, achieving very little resistance to floods, cyclones and insect attack, and providing little security for their belongings or the occupants.

The occupants are the same people most frequently at risk from storms and floods.

The head count measure of rural poverty went down slightly during the first half of the nineties: from 53% in 1991/92 to 51% in 1995/96. Over the entire period between 1983/84 and 1995/96, the rural head count declined by only 2.7 percentage points. There is an improvement in the urban poverty situation in Bangladesh during the nineties from 34% in 1991/92 to little over 26% in 1995/96. This trend of a degree of improvement in urban poverty is due to the rapid pace of urbanisation over the recent years.

Despite the faster rate of poverty reduction in the urban areas, its overall impact on the poverty state of the nation has been rather modest due to the low weight of overall urban population. According to the recent World Bank estimates, the national head-count declined by only 0.5 percentage points per year during 1983-95.

Aid currently finances four fifths of the development budget and provides approximately half of the government's total finance. Aid is now equivalent to more than 10% of the country's gross domestic product. Aid fills the country's large trade deficit which is almost double its current level of export-earnings. Thus the country is hugely dependent on foreign aid. This

underlines the total inability of the Bangladeshi ruling class to develop the country, in spite of the government's rhetoric on "self-reliance". The government finds it much easier to rely on the flow of capital from abroad than to develop the economy from local resources. Aid also promotes patronage and corruption by keeping all kinds of regimes afloat which would otherwise sink under the weight of popular discontent. In Bangladesh, aid has financed narrow, elite-based governments which cling to power by suppressing political dissent.

Bangladesh's poverty is rooted in the social order, which benefits a small elite at the expense of the poor majority. The elite holds power from the national government down to the village level, and it is through this elite that foreign aid is channelled. Under such conditions foreign investors can expect their aid dollars to perpetuate rather than "alleviate" poverty in Bangladesh. Though 85%-90% of the population is rural only one third of government rationed foodgrains go to rural areas and often not to the needy. In a country where survival often depends on access to arable land, 33% of households are landless and another 29% survive from holdings of an acre or less.

Over the past 14 years, with the so-called democratic elections, the past and present governments of the Awami League (AL) and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) have been riddled with corruption and bureaucracy. Economic development in Bangladesh has been much less than its actual potential. This is due to imperialist domination and the utter inability of the local bourgeois to be anything other than a loyal servant of their foreign masters. In this, the different cliques that make up the local ruling elite have been in constant conflict with one another. At the same time, the anger of the masses has been expressed in the frequent hartals (general strikes).

The biggest obstacle for Bangladesh and other so-called underdeveloped countries is the domination of imperialism and the existence of capitalism. This system is incapable of meeting the basic human requirements of food, clothing and shelter. It is no surprise that crime is on the increase. The roots of poverty in most so-called underdeveloped countries can be traced to the era of colonial rule. Far from "developing" these countries, colonial rule meant many years of neglect and oppression at the hands of the colonial powers. After the colonial powers were forced to leave and abandon direct military control, they continued to dominate through the local comprador bourgeois elite, who have run these countries with the mere aim of enriching themselves personally while carrying out the dictates of their

imperialist masters. Within the context of capitalism and imperialism, there is no way out for the peoples of countries like Bangladesh.

So, rather than "poverty alleviation", what is essentially needed is a revolutionary change, a revolutionary transformation of society. This means expropriating the corrupt local bourgeoisie and the imperialists. Bangladesh could be the spark that sets off the all-South Asian socialist revolution. In a Socialist Federation of Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and the rest of the South-Asian subcontinent, the resources would be available to massively develop the economy of all these countries. Once the dead hand of capitalism and landlordism is lifted the people would be free to develop their economies harmoniously in an international plan of production.

But the problem is that this kind of change does not fall from the sky. To bring about this kind of change it would require a genuine revolutionary leadership of the Bangladeshi workers and peasants. Without such a leadership no real revolutionary change is possible.

Without this it is not possible for a nation to turn its situation around. The potential for revolution is there. It needs to be channeled 6.8. Political environment: On January 11, 2007, Bangladesh's president, with the backing of the military, interrupted the democratic process and postponed pending elections with the stated purpose of restoring public order to the nation. The caretaker quickly adopted emergency powers that brought all political activity to a halt, placed restraints on freedom of expression and threatened critics of the government with criminal penalties. These measures, though severe, were apparently supported by many Bangladeshis.

While Bangladesh's Constitution envisions a caretaker with powers limited to preparing for an election, the new caretaker government launched an ambitious reform programmes and announced that it would need two years to complete its tasks. The programme included addressing economic problems, endemic corruption, independence of the judiciary, as well as civil service and electoral reforms.

As part of the government's anti-corruption drive, Sheikh Hasina, the leader of the Awami League, and Khaleda Zia, the head of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), were taken into custody on corruption charges. It was widely reported that efforts were made to force both leaders into exile. This was labeled the "minus two" strategy. However, Sheikh Hasina

and Khaleda Zia are no longer in custody and are heading their parties in the lead-up to the national elections.

While the political landscape remains much the same as before the January 11 military intervention, there are some new developments. Several new parties have emerged and plan to contest in the coming polls. These new entrants into the nation's political life demonstrate the continuing interest and enthusiasm of many to participate in the political process.

There remains strong support for many of the caretaker government's reforms. However, there is every indication, including public opinion polls, that Bangladeshis want an early return to elected government. The nation is enthusiastic about the coming election, but disappointment will again result if political polarization, the failure to deal with corruption and the use of coercive tactics once again threaten to disrupt the political process.

6.9. Election Commission: The Election Commission is responsible for all election preparations including establishing the election schedule, delimiting constituencies, registering political parties and maintaining voter rolls. The Commission is designated as an independent body in the Constitution but the appointment of key personnel is controlled by the Prime Minister, or in this case, by the Chief Adviser. Following the January 2007 military intervention, the new caretaker government replaced the commissioners appointed by the previous government.

The new Chief Election Commissioner is highly regarded by most observers of Bangladesh's electoral process. However, the Election Commission became embroiled in a controversy when it invited a breakaway faction of the BNP to attend a series of dialogues the commission was conducting with the political parties. The Commission later acknowledged that this invitation was a mistake.

The commission has worked to build confidence with political parties although some disagreements over the election rules and regulations remain. The Commission discussed its proposed modifications to electoral laws with the political parties during three consultative rounds conducted this year. The recent amendments to the Representation of the People Order (RPO) 1972, Bangladesh's electoral law, include regulations that stipulate that the commission can cancel candidatures for electoral law violations and misconduct. This provision, in particular, has been criticized by the political parties as granting excessive discretion to election officials. In addition, the amendments include the compulsory

registration of parties and candidate disclosures, democratization of internal decision-making through regular party elections, transparency in finances and fundraising, a 33 percent minimum quota for women in all party decision-making bodies, and scrutiny of candidates' income and asset statements. While some political parties expressed concern with the level of information and documentation now required for candidate nomination, others indicated that the regulations generally seek to encourage openness and transparency in the political process. Potential candidates are required to file a 16-page form with the commission that includes detailed information on their financial holdings.

The August 4, 2008, municipal and city corporation elections, which were non-partisan, were considered a test or pilot run for elections conducted under emergency rule. There were no major incidents of election-related violence that were reported and the candidates expressed their general satisfaction regarding the overall voting environment.

The commission is also conducting a dialogue with the media on a draft code of conduct. The four objectives of the draft code are : to provide a set of guiding principles for the mass media, ensure candidates' equitable access to mass media, provide adequate and accurate information on matters relevant to elections, and allow the media to perform their responsibility of providing voters with elections education. The proposed draft allows the media to report on opinion polls, election projection and exit polls. The media cannot present results as "official" until the commission has done so. Under the code, the media must also maintain a balance in the coverage of candidates and political parties.

Judicial reform was also an important part of the caretaker government's programme. Several steps have been made to help guarantee judicial independence such as amending the Criminal Procedure Ordinance and the Judicial Service Commission Pay Order. To finally establish an independent judiciary, however, it remains necessary to amend Article 116 of Bangladesh's Constitution. This can only be done by parliament.

The reason why such a set up was established in Bangladesh is clear. The demand for neutral caretaker government largely originated from a lack of trust in the political government under which the election was held. The past tradition of Bangladesh was one of rigged and fraudulent elections, and such malpractices were usually carried out by the outgoing government in power misusing their authority. The idea was that an interim authority would

be acceptable to both the ruling as well as opposition parties. Its role was to complete the election process within three months, after which the elected government was expected to take charge.

But this time the Awami League led opposition coalition declared that the ruling coalition would manipulate the present caretaker government system of conducting elections in Bangladesh in the future, thus making it more difficult for the opposition to win an election.

Hence it has been demanding electoral reforms since July 2005 through street protests. It wants certain changes in the Caretaker government system and the Election Commission.

Though some attempts were made to resolve the controversy, the deep-rooted hostility between the two political parties kept them poles apart. On the eve of the transfer of power to the interim authority a last ditch attempt was made to resolve the controversy.

CHAPTER-SEVEN Drawbacks of the Caretaker Government The caretaker government of Bangladesh may or may not be acting as a tool in the hands of military, but its prolonged stay might lead to unpalatable consequences. Several Bangladesh leaders feel that the present environment would create a negative image of politicians and put military in a positive light. In these circumstances, it is possible that some army General might try to seize power. Several people in Bangladesh also feel that as the crackdown is being done against the corrupt leaders and not against those leaders who have been associated with Islamist militancy, and that it might actually strengthen extremist forces.

They feel that under emergency only the political activity is banned and not the religious activity. This situation might result in a strengthened political Islam which would be equally dangerous. Finally, some also believe that by delaying election in Bangladesh the CTG might actually be acting in favour of BNP, because a quick election now is expected to bring Awami League with a huge majority in power. A delay might change this situation.

Bangladesh constitution has visualized the caretaker government as a stop-gap arrangement to hold elections. But this time circumstances took such a turn where a number of new responsibilities have fallen on the second caretaker government in charge after the end of the Khaleda Zia regime. The new caretaker government appears sincere in implementing these responsibilities. But this has also delayed the holding of elections in Bangladesh and installation of a democratically elected government. Bangladesh at the moment appears to be grappling with these difficult questions and conflicting expectations.

7.1. Demerits of the 13th Amendment: Firstly, though the Chief Adviser of the caretaker government has been given the status of a Prime Minister, from legal point of view, he has been made subservient to the President and he has not been given the full power as a Prime Minister in ordinary situation can exercise. According to article 58E the President is not bound to act in accordance with the advice of the Chief Adviser. Again, article 58B (2) stipulates that the non-party caretaker government shall be collectively responsible to the President. Thus President retains the power to cancel any decision of the caretaker government and even the caretaker government itself. Since the Chief Adviser along with all advisers of the caretaker government is nonpolitical and non-partisan person and since he will exercise his powers only for three months to conduct a general election, no power-expectation will work within him, he should have been, for the sake of independent exercise of his function, given the same constitutional power as the Prime Minister does have.

Secondly, while the caretaker government is in power the unfettered power over the defence has been vested upon the President. During ordinary situations though the supreme command of the defence is vested in the President, he exercises this function only in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister. But the 13th Amendment is silent about this matter. Thus the most powerful way to act in an arbitrary manner is retained with the President.

Thirdly, this interim caretaker government will be in power for 3 months only; they will not have any policy formulating functions and they will be in power without any prior experience of governing the country. So it is likely that this government may create obstacle in the smooth functioning and developments of policies initiated by the previous government.11 This is, of course, the strongest argument against the concept of separate caretaker government. It is also true that very few instances can be found where after every 5 years or after every dissolution of parliament a separate politically inexpert government sits in power for conducting a general election. But the fact of the Bangladesh politics as far as it concerns its election politics is that a free and fair election has been a far cry in the history of Bangladesh since its independence and the interim government of Justice Sahabuddin Ahmed after the fall of Ershad regime has made a historic success in holding a free and fair election 11

Ibid

and this success had turned the concept of caretaker government into a political reality which has, through the 13th Amendment, been a constitutional reality.

But analysing the Amendment from true viewpoint of constitutionalism we would say that 13th Amendment is against the principle of institutionalisation of democracy. Because as a result of this Amendment a wrong conception will always work in the minds of the people and young learners that the government in power cannot be above the corruption and manipulation of election process; secondly, the Election Commission as a constitutional institution of democracy for controlling, conducting and superintending the whole election process is inherently weak and cannot be made in a position to be institutionalised; thirdly, the whole governing process particularly the bureaucracy will get a swing on a regular interval which may hamper the smooth functioning of the administration.

7.2. Where lays the weakness of the caretaker government?

With the change in the political scenario in Bangladesh and government becoming more lenient towards corruption and corrupted politicians and giving more importance towards an election with the participation of politicians of all feathers, many people become frustrated. They questioned the objectives of the caretaker government and many concluded that the government is to some extent already a failure.

The ordinary citizen also ponders over the situation and tries and still trying to understand the underlying cause of the shift of the political situation in Bangladesh. He assessed that the expectation of the people was too high to the caretaker government after 1/11. There is little to blame the common people. The expectation was actually created by the caretaker government itself and their sponsors by their projections of their objectives and their initial steps.

But the changed scenario actually exposes the inner weakness of the caretaker government.

The caretaker government is virtually a group of heterogeneous people, who are not bounded by the common ideology and where the attitudes and ideas develop differently and their approach to solve a problem also, differ in the same tenure of the government.

But it is found the role of the military was more indirect, from distant and was not uniform in this fusion. People could feel the presence of the military but could not hold them responsible for the failure of the government if any. The indirect relation of the military gives the

government more acceptability but less strength and as the days are coming to the end for the caretaker government, the shadow of the military is more fading.

So, the caretaker government by its nature proves to be a weak government which is not empowered by the constitution to do any major changes other than holding a free and fair election. At the end of its declared tenure, let us hope that at least a free and fair election the nation would be able to see.

The approach of this civil-military government fusion initially was more military in nature, but at the end it is more civil in character. The time proves that it would have been better if the government be more civil from the beginning. It would take less time for them to hold an election free and fair then. Some may argue that though the effort to try the corrupts nosedived, the CTG has made reforms in many constitutional bodies and the election commission has made a voter list with national ID card with the help of military which is a historical achievment for Bangladesh. The constituional reforms would have no value if the next parliament does not endorse them, that means that the CTG has no constitutional right to make all these reforms and taking 2 years to make an electronic database of the voters as the only reason to lenghen the tenure of the CTG would not be acceptable to people. Regarding the separation of judiciary, people have profound doubt about its independence and efficiency.

Elections in Bangladesh should be conducted by the Election Commission of Bangladesh, the authority should be created under the constitution. It is a well established convention around the world that once the election process commences; no courts intervene until the results are declared by the election commission. During the elections, vast powers should be assigned to the election commission to the extent that it can function as a civil court, if needed.

7.3. Blanket criticism of CG will hurt democracy: The blanket criticism of the 2007-2008 caretaker government will only stymie democratic progress, the ruling Awami League's general secretary said on Monday-"We should not forget that this caretaker government made a photo-based voters roll, held a fair election and put in place a neutral administration," 12 said at a discussion to mark 16th anniversary of Awami Swechchhashebok League, the party's volunteer organisation, at the Central Shaheed Minar premises.

12

Islam. Ashraful. Syed Awami League's general secretary

"Prime minister Sheikh Hasina said in parliament said all this. She said they did injustice to her and her Awami League. But we have to keep in mind how that situation was created. He blamed BNP-Jamaat-led alliance for Jan 11, 2007 changeover that made way for an interim admiistration widely crtiticised for acting as a front for the military.

"1/11 would not have happened if countrywide fake voters' list and conspiracy over Jan. 22 elections were not made, the Election Commission headed by M A Aziz and the caretaker government by president Iajuddin Ahmed were not made partisan."

7.4. President Professor Dr Iajuddin Ahmed speaking at a journalists gathering at Bangabhaban: The President hosted a tea-party for the editors and senior journalists of both the print and electronic media to expresses his deep gratitude to the media for playing an objective and constructive role during his tenure as the head of the state extended over six years.

The President said, the ninth parliamentary elections was held on December 29 in a free and fair manner, which make the foundation of democracy more strengthen.

The President expressed his hope that the dynamic leadership and time befitting programmes of the new government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina would be able to start a new trend of development and advancement. President Iajuddin said, at one stage, after the eighth parliament, he had to take the responsibility as chief of the caretaker government considering the prevailing situation of that time."By the way, after passing a transition period with facing various ups-and-downs and blows-and-counterblows, we have reached at a stage where democracy won, 14 crore people of the country won," The President also said, he had always tried to carry out his responsibilities upholding the truth and justice for the interests of the country and the nation.

The present government is committed to provide full freedom to mass media and ensure free flow of information. He hoped that the country's media would play their objective role upholding truth and justice in the future as in the past to help the new government reaching its desired goal. He urged the journalists to give constructive opinions by their writings so

that the new government would be able to build a happy and prosperous Bangladesh as per its election manifesto.

Professor Iajuddin might be criticized by the media on some particular issue as the President of the country but never been criticized as a person.

7.5. Bangladesh: Caretaker Government on the Offensive Bangladesh Monitor Paper: Bangladesh has been awaiting elections since the last government led by Khaleda Zia handed over charge to the caretaker government (CTG) on October 29, 2006. Though the CTG headed by President Iajuddin Ahmed tried to hold the elections after hurriedly declaring a schedule, the controversy surrounding the institution of CTG and the Election Commission headed by then Chief Election Commissioner M.A. Aziz prohibited them from doing so. The main opposition alliance led by the Awami League, instead of starting electioneering, intensified its agitation for political and electoral reforms. It accused the CTG, the EC and the administration of being biased towards the former government of Khaleda Zia. It refused to participate in the elections unless these anomalies were corrected and a level playing field was created. Awami League did not stop here, and also demanded that the corrupt ministers and officials of the former government should be punished, little realizing that its a prolonged process which might actually delay the election process for a very long time. The interregnum might also give an opportunity to forces which are not democratic.

The volatile political situation in Bangladesh forced Iajuddin Ahmed to step down and appoint Fakhruddin Ahmed in his place, at the head of a new CTG. This has helped to restore to a certain extent political stability in the country.

The new CTG has now managed to successfully reconstitute the Election Commission (EC).

The deadlock was finally resolved on January 31, when all five Bangladesh Election Commissioners, including acting Chief Election Commissioner Justice Mahfuzur Rahman, resigned on the request of president. Following this the Law Advisor of Bangladesh Mainul Hosein revealed the intention of the caretaker government to form a three-member Election Commission as part of the reform package. Initially, former secretary ATM Shamsul Huda was appointed as chief election commissioner (CEC) whereas another former bureaucrat Mohammad Sohul Hossain was appointed as election commissioner. The process of reconstitution of the EC was completed with the appointment of its third member, Brigadier

General (retd) M Sakhawat Hossain as an election commissioner. This is the first time an officer with military background has been appointed in the EC. In the meantime, the CTG has taken an unprecedented step. Bangladesh has been notorious for extreme corruption. For the last, several years it had the dubious distinction of being the most corrupt nation. Even this year it is at the third rank. Awami League, during its agitation had been demanding crackdown on corrupt politicians. At that time, probably it was merely a strategy to denounce the former BNP ministers, who were no doubt extremely corrupt during their tenure. Awami Legue, knew that it was virtually impossible for the CTG headed by Iajuddin Ahmed to crackdown on his corrupt party men. Here it should be remembered that Iajuddin Ahmed had become president with the support of BNP and earlier belonged to that party.

Things changed dramatically with the new caretaker government. The Fakhruddin Ahmed headed government is widely seen as a front for military of Bangladesh. At least, one thing is sure, it has strong backing of military. This military backed CTG launched a crackdown on corrupt politicians. It arrested a number of senior politicians belonging to both political alliances. Eight of the detainees, including Ex-minister Nazmul Huda and Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury, are close aides of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. The majority of arrested leaders were part of the four party alliances that were in government.

However, the Law Adviser Mainul Hosein told media that the caretaker government will take actions not only against the corrupt politicians of the immediate past government but also those of any other government. Most of these leaders have been detained under country's Special Powers Act (SPA). Under the SPA, anyone can be detained for a month while police frame possible charges against them.

The caretaker government has managed to tighten noose around some of the high profile people in Bangladesh politics. The army-led joint forces recovered a good amount of relief materials including quilts and pipes from the Prime Minister's relief fund from the residence of Tarique Rahman, eldest son of the immediate past Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. They have also seized government relief materials from a business establishment of former BNP lawmaker and businessman Mosaddak Ali Falu in Savar on February 10.

The arrest of corrupt political leaders has been generally appreciated. At the same time, it is feared that these arrests will be of no use, unless the charges against them are proved, and these leaders are penalized for their acts of corruption.

The caretaker government has barred corrupt people from participating in any parliamentary or local government election by amending the rules of Emergency Power Ordinance (EPO).

Any person, convicted of corruption by a trial court, will be disqualified from contesting in any election until adjudication of his or her appeal against the verdict and no convicted person will ever be able to hold any job related to the government, according to the amendments to the rules.

The CTG has also managed to reconstitute the Anti-corruption Commission (ACC). Its Chairman Justice Sultan Hossain Khan and Commissioner Prof Maniruzzaman Miah submitted their resignations to the president on February 7, while the other Commissioner Maniruddin Ahmed said that he would take some time to submit his own. Though processed through a selection committee, their appointments were believed to have been made on political considerations.

Concrete steps have been taken to separate the judiciary from the executive. The council of advisers at a meeting on February 7 approved the ordinance on amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), necessary for separation of the judiciary from the executive. This will be promulgated by the President in a couple of days. With this promulgation, the longawaited separation of the judiciary will come into effect. After the separation is done, the magistrates, who are currently under the control of the executive, will then come under the authority of the higher court and be known as judicial magistrates. The general public of Bangladesh which has been suffering at the hands of corrupt political leaders has welcomed the actions of CTG. But apprehensions have been expressed in the western media that this government is actually a front for Bangladesh military and might actually pave way for military take over in Bangladesh.

International Crisis Group said in a report published late last month that the Caretaker Government has not dealt with the country’s business community in a prudent way that discourages new investment. The Brussels-based group also said that despite some well received efforts to institute tax and institutional reforms, the interim administration’s

anticorruption drive severely damaged business confidence, creating an atmosphere of fear and scared off new investment. The group said government has also recognized the anticorruption drive’s adverse impact on the economy and that prompted it to form a publicprivate body to help better the country’s business atmosphere.

7.6. Record breaking Caretaker Government: When the constitution was amended in 1996 to create the so-called “caretaker government” system primarily to ensure that election would be held under neutral authority, did the lawmakers even imagined in their wildest dream that there would be need to elect that government twice? I doubt it especially considering the short length of the government’s term in the office of only about 90 days.

Though the appointment of Dr Ahmed was done after negotiations and reaching a consensus by two major parties – BNP and 4 party alliance and the AL and the mega alliance, surprisingly BNP and 4 party alliance refrained from attending the oath ceremony. Hopefully that is not a sign of yet another approaching dark cloud.

Maj Gen (retd) MA Matin termed the allegation of slow poisoning Sheikh Hasina a nasty slander and a deliberate attempt of some political leaders and their associates to gain political ground.

"It is very shocking to be accused of attempting on someone's life," said Matin on allegations of slow poisoning Sheikh Hasina when she was detained.

Matin said this while talking to The Daily Star yesterday during an interview at his Panchlaish residence in Chittagong regarding allegations of slow poisoning Hasina brought against him. He was home, shipping and liberation war affairs adviser to the caretaker government when Hasina was in detention.

"The allegation is completely false. It is a statement made to serve political purpose." Said Maj Gen (retd) MA Matin "As the Prime Minister herself is the alleged victim, ministries concerned may take the probe initiatives with her approval,"

All the intelligence agencies like DGFI, National Security Intelligence, Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and Special Branch of Police, and Rapid Action Battalion were involved in the security measures, he added.

There were two doctors from the ministry of health to examine all their food the two leaders were served those.

Asked about allegations of not allowing Prof Sayed Modasser Ali, health adviser to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, to collect blood sample from Hasina for medical tests during her detention, Matin said nobody ever came to him requesting such permissions.

"We are hearing about allegations of slow poisoning only for the last few days," Matin said.

He said he does not think that these allegations have been brought to justify a bid to abolish the caretaker government system.

On making lists of political leaders and arresting them in graft charges, he said it was taken care of by the intelligence agencies, particularly the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI).

In this regard he specially mentioned the names of the then DGFI Director General Maj Gen Golam Mohammad (now serving as the GOC of Comilla Cantonment) and Maj Gen (retd) ATM Amin and Brig Gen Chowdhury Fazlul Bari (posted to the Bangladesh Mission in Washington DC during the caretaker government's rule and now being considered as a fugitive by military authorities). These people were holding key posts at the DGFI at that time.

7.7. Speaker Jamiruddin Sircar dubs the Caretaker Government: The Jatiya Sangsad speaker, Muhammad Jamiruddin Sircar, has termed “irregular” the present interim government of Fakhruddin Ahem, which failed to conduct the general election within the constitutionally mandated timeframe.

‘We say not an illegal government…It is an irregular government. This will be regularised only when the national election is held,’ said the speaker asking the government to concentrate on parliamentary polls with priority.

The main purpose of the caretaker government is to conduct the election and its function is to carry out the regular affairs of the state, not to take any policy decision, stated the Speaker while launching a World Bank-funded project strengthening the Public Accounts Committee on Sunday in Dhaka.

He said the constitutional responsibility of the caretaker government, by nature an interim administration, to carry out the routine works, and provide support to the election commission to conduct a free, fair and impartial parliamentary election within 90 days of dissolution of parliament.

Referring to Article 58D of the constitution, which deals with functions of the non-party government, said the caretaker government has no mandate to pursue or take any policy decision.

Now the elected government is absent, it is a non-representative government,’ said the speaker adding that enactment of any law, other than necessary in relation to the election, is also policy decision. ‘Therefore, the government has no right to enact a law as per the constitution.’ said among them the PAC is most important mechanism to ensure the executive’s accountability to the people. Strengthening of this committee would also enhance the parliament’s power to make executive more accountable.

All along have been more on the optimistic side on the current CTG brining positive changes to the nation’s political landscape. Though strongly believe that there is simply no alternative of running a government by none other than elected officials, the political situation in Bangladesh took such unique turn preceding January 11 that there was no alternative from preventing an imminent civil war but to declare a State of Emergency. The event of January 11 of course made it necessary for the CTG to take the office for a rather lengthy period which may well continue for another 18 months or so until we hold an election.

Couple of the major things that has been the center of criticism of the CTG for majority, those same issues has been my concerns also.

1) Expected length of 18 months to prepare the voter-list thus delaying the election.

2) Possible political ambition of the Army that is backing the current CTG. 3) Restrictions on indoor politics.

#1: The CTG has made it very clear all along that they will not be in the office a day longer than necessary. They have also made it clear that it can and most likely will take up to 18 months to create the voter-list. That clearly doesn’t mean that it will take exactly 18 months, it can take much less time based on resource allocation and response and cooperation from the citizens. People with slightest of experience in planning and project managing knows that a “buffer” time is always incorporated into the timeline. If CTG had promised to have the voter-list done in 8 months and they failed to meet that deadline, sure they would be subject to tremendous criticism locally and internationally. #2: The Army has made it clear about their disinterest in politics after the January 11 declaration of the State of Emergency. Over time they have asserted on their disinterest in politics and even as early as yesterday the Army Chief Lt General Moeen Ahmed renewed his vow on behalf of the Army in a meeting with top media leaders on having no interest in politics.

7.8. Continuing emergency illegal under the Constitution and International law: 1. The Caretaker Government was constituted under the provisions of the Constitution (Thirteenth Amendment) Act, proclaimed State of Emergency on 11 January 2007 purportedly under Article 141 A of the Constitution 1 , in the absence of the Parliament and obviously without satisfying constitutional requirement ‘for its validity the prior counter signature of the Prime Minister’. To justify such an extreme move, the President in his Act of Proclamation said that since security and economic life of the country was threatened by internal disturbances, he had to impose Emergency, although substantive evidence was lacking. The irony is that the state of the economy has declined since the proclamation of Emergency and life of the people of Bangladesh has been hard hit due to gross mismanagement, insensitivity to the poor and the disadvantage and overall breakdown of social and economic institutions. The President also suspended number of fundamental rights.

2. Odhikar has, since then, expressed concern against such an extra constitutional move anticipating serious constitutional, political, economic crisis that may justifiably question the responsibility of those who uncritically supported such move, remaining singularly focused on ‘corruption’. As a human rights organisation, Odhikar could not accept any justification to limit or curtail fundamental rights, particularly in art.141A.1 of the Constitution of the

Peoples Republic of Bangladesh: ‘If the president is satisfied that a grave emergency exists in which the security or economic life of Bangladesh, or any part thereof, is threatened by war or external aggression or internal disturbance, he may issue a Proclamation of Emergency. political, legal and cultural scenario where extrajudicial killing, death in custody, torture without impunity, etc. are becoming the norm.

3. International legal provisions under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 (ICCPR) state that in time of “public emergency” which threatens the “life of the nation” and its “existence,” limited measures could be taken. But the Covenant has set a test and high threshold in Article 4.1. in that measures taken must be “to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation” and cannot be “inconsistent with other obligations under international law.” Emergency proclaimed in Bangladesh by a non‐representative government who were supposed to simply conduct a free and fair election, have also failed to meet international obligations.

4. After a year and half of the Proclamation of Emergency, there is no evidence of public emergency to ‘threaten the life of the nation or its existence’, required under international law or any ‘internal disturbances endangering the security of Bangladesh and its economic life’ the two key excuses used to impose Emergency.

5. Since there are no such threats, either on security or economic fronts, the grounds of invoking Article 141 A of the Constitution no longer exists. Proclaiming or continue Emergency rule in the absence of any serious threat endangering nation’s life, violate the Constitution and the ICCPR, that Bangladesh has acceded to and is a State Party since December 2000.

6. Odhikar therefore demands that state of emergency is lifted immediately. Its continuation is unconstitutional, illegal and contravenes obligations under international laws.

The damaged Constitution: 7. The Constitution has been abused badly in the last 18 months. The current Caretaker Government has taken advantage of the perceived ambiguity of the Constitution in Article 58B on length of Caretaker administration. It has also flouted precedents set twice by two previous Caretaker governments, of holding parliamentary elections within 90 days. The Constitution provides that there shall be a Non-Party Caretaker Government during the period from the date on which the Chief Adviser of such government enters upon office after Parliament is dissolved or stands dissolved by reason of expiration of its term till the date on which a new Prime Minister enters into office after the constitution of Parliament. The

present Caretaker Government has yet to hold parliamentary elections, even after a year and half a job done in three months by its predecessors.

8. Odhikar believes that by not following earlier precedents and holding general elections within three months, the present Caretaker Government has set a very bad precedent about the tenure of such governments.

7.9. Religious terrorism: Law minister Barrister Shafiq Ahmed yesterday said that the amendment of the 1972 constitution paved the way for the grooming of the religious terrorism in the country.

Inaugurating a workshop on the 'Anti Terrorism Act 2009' organised by the Bangladesh Enterprise Institute (BEI), the minister also noted that many Qaumi madrasas were used as the breeding ground for Islamic militancy and government was planning to bring the madrasas in the mainstream education system.

"Article 31 and Article 12 of the constitution of 1972 contained some provisions which strictly prohibited floating of political party based on religion and the use of religion for materisalising any political interest was banned. Unfortunately, these provisions were omitted from the constitution during the post 1975 period and the religion based politics started in the country" the law minister said.

However, former caretaker government Adviser Maj Gen (Retd) Moinul Hossain Chowdhury, who also attended the function, opined that it was not the amendment of the constitution, rather economic and geopolitical aspects ignited the rise of the Islamic militancy in the region including Bangladesh.

"Government's policymakers should also consider these aspects otherwise the fight against militancy could be a futile exercise," he said when asked to comment on law minister's view following the meeting.

The minister said that there are 122 groups which are involved in terrorist activities in the country.

In this regard, he mentioned that the foreign intervention in the Afghanistan prompted the mushrooming of the religious militants in the region.

Earlier, the law minister also criticised General Ershad's move to label the country an 'Islamic State' through amending the constitution and said that the 1972 constitution ensured that all could perform their respective religion and state would be neutral about it which was the true spirit of democracy.

Responding to a question he said that it was too early to say whether the 1972 constitution would be restored or not.

"We have just passed two and half months. So you cannot press for it right now. Wait and see," he said.

The minister also gave vent for the present madrasa education system saying that their curriculum lacked modern education, which resulted in the failure of the madrasa students in getting jobs after completing the education.

"The education ministry is conducting a survey on the madrasas with a view to streamline them through registration. Under this process the Qaumi madrasas would be able to get the financial assistance from the government. Presently these are not getting any financial help from the government which prompted them to seek financial aid from various sources," he added.

CHAPTER-EIGHT Proposals 8.1. Proposal by the Opposition to reform Caretaker Government Provision:

In July, 2005 the AL including other opposition alliances made some reform proposals with regard to caretaker government and the election commission with a view to ensuring free and fair election. The proposals are as follows: (i) The Chief Adviser and the Chief Election Commissioner shall be appointed upon consensus among all political parties. (ii) The Caretaker Government should not remain responsible to the President. They will be accountable to their conscience, to the people and to the next parliament. (iii) The Chief Adviser of the Caretaker Government should enjoy the full authority of the prime minister of a parliamentary system during the interim period of non-party rule. The President will act on the advice of the Chief Adviser of the Caretaker Government. (iv) Armed forces are to be put under the Caretaker Government's control instead of the President. (v) The Election Commission must have its own secretariat and it must have economic independence.

However, the BNP Government did not accept these proposals and critiques tend to say that there are loopholes and inconsistencies with the proposals.

8.2. Bangladesh as we want to see in 2021:

Caretaker Government, Democracy & Effective Parliament *Democracy and strong democratic institutions will be established for holding reliable election at regular intervals, accountability of government and effective Parliament. All necessary steps will be taken for making Parliament effective.

8.3. Ruling alliance wants caretaker govt system consigned to bin:

• The High Court today issued a rule upon the government to explain why former NSI director Sahab Uddin should not be granted bail in the Chittagong arms haul case.

• A writ petition was filed with the High Court (HC) today seeking direction from the court upon the government to • Lawmakers of the ruling coalition Sunday proposed that the caretaker government system should be done away with.

The provision for the caretaker government was incorporated in the constitution in 1996 for a period of transition to oversee holding of a free and fair general election and hand over power to an elected government.

‘I call on the lawmakers to strengthen the Election Commission and scrap the caretaker government system,’ Sajeda Chowdhury, deputy leader of the house, told parliament while taking part in general discussion on the proposed budget for the 2009-10 financial year.13 ‘We do not need the caretaker government system if we can strengthen the Election Commission,’ said the leader of the ruling Awami League, which mobilised street protests to

13

Please Visit: http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:mNTD-jy8CuYJ:www.bd64.com/today1. php

%3Fid%3D8028+Caretaker+Government-1996+in+Bangladeh&cd=3&hl= en&ct=clnk&gl=bd. Last Visited:16.08.2009

compel the then Bangladesh Nationalist Party government to incorporate the provision in the constitution in the mid-1990s.

The BNP government, which lasted only 11 days after the controversial elections in February 1996, amended the constitution to introduce the system. Awami League won the general elections held under the first constitutional caretaker government on June 12, 1996, which the BNP termed rigged and the AL brought similar charge against the elections in 2001, which the BNP-led alliance won.

The 2006 caretaker government went beyond its constitutionally mandated timeframe as well as jurisdiction. Backed by the military, it stayed in office for more than two yeas and threw a number of leading politicians in prison on charges of corruption before it arranged the elections on December 29, 2008. The AL-led alliance won a landslide parliamentary majority in the polls with the mainstream opposition BNP branding it a conspiracy.

Hasanul Haq Inu of Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal, another ally of the Awami League, proposed to increase allocation for the armed forces to equip them with modern arms and ammunition. He said Tipaimukh dam should not be built as it would harm people’s livelihoods and the environment in Bangladesh and India.

State minister for law Quamrul Islam said the government would start investigation and trial of the 1971 war crimes at the earliest.

More than 30 lawmakers, including ministers Abdur Razzak, Sahara Khatun, Abdul Larif Siddiqui, Abdul Mannan Khan and ABM Tajul Islam, whips ASM Firoz and Abdul Wahab, lawmakers Gazi Golam Dastgir, Muhibur Rahman Manik, Nazrul Islam Babu, Zahid Malik, HN Ashekur Rahman and Lutful Hye Sachchu, participated in the discussion chaired by speaker Abdul Hamid and deputy speaker Shawkat Ali. They opposed the proposal of the finance minister for ‘blanket whitening of the “black” and undisclosed money.’They criticised the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party for skipping the proceedings of the budget session.

8.4. Sajeda demands end to caretaker govt system:

Deputy leader of the House Syeda Sajeda Chowdhury has demanded that the caretaker government system be repealed. She has also said that if the election commission

could be strengthened and made totally independent there was no need of the caretaker system.

"The immediate-past caretaker government stayed in power for two years and three months unconstitutionally plunging the country into stagnation," Sajeda said while taking part in the general discussion on the budget in parliament yesterday. Sajeda said for lack of farsightedness, the past caretaker government made the economy slip into a slump pushing up the price of essentials. She also alleged that the caretaker government had failed to give general election in scheduled three-month timeframe and turned the country into a jail. Sajeda said the December 20 polls proved that, if the Election Commission could be strengthened and made independent, there would be no need of caretaker government.

The Awami League leader urged the lawmakers to repeal the system of caretaker government by strengthening the Election Commission. As Sajeda spoke for doing away with the caretaker government, Prime Minister and Leader of the House Sheikh Hasina was sitting beside her. Sajeda also heard echo of her proposal in JP chief Hussain Mohammed Ershad's speech. Taking part in the budget discussion, JP chief and former army chief-turned President Ershad said the system of caretaker government is a stigma for the politicians.

"We've stated against the system time and again. We want to go back to previous system and we want and end to it," he told the House about the interim government of nonpartisan persons that was introduced after his government's downfall in the 1990 mass movement.

The caretaker government was incorporated in the constitution through the 15th amendment and under this constitutional provision three parliamentary elections had been held, excepting the one held in 1991 just after the restoration of democratic system.

8.5. Critical governance reforms accomplished: Looking back, together, we had lived through some very difficult times. Since the political deadlock in late 2006 and subsequently, the installation of the present caretaker government in January 2007, we have witnessed a series of key economic and governance reforms by the caretaker government, to ensure timely and effective transition to an elected government. I believe that none of you will disagree the current caretaker government has gone the extra mile to restore law and order, and to improve the overall governance setting, by implementing several key governance reforms, including the separation of the Judiciary

from the Executive, reconstitution and operationalization of the Anti-Corruption Commission, ratification of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, reconstitution of the Election and the Public Service Commissions, and establishment of the Local Government Commission. The Government is also expected to enact a law very soon on the Right to Information, and prepare a National Integrity Strategy to address the issue of ethics and corruption in a holistic manner.

Improving good governance in a developing country like Bangladesh is not a quick and simple task. Though, we’re indeed impressed by the pace of unprecedented governance reforms that Bangladesh has achieved during the last 18 months. There are challenges ahead, but we are all hopeful that these reforms will be sustained in the future. It will be pertinent to mention that ADB has placed good governance as one of the strategic priorities in its assistance program to Bangladesh. Last November the ADB-supported Good Governance Program came into effect, through which we are providing the Government of Bangladesh $150 million over four years to undertake a comprehensive governance reforms program in the jurisdiction of ACC, the judiciary, and other core institutions to strengthen government’s core and sector level anti-corruption measures. We sincerely believe that the December general election will lay the foundations of a democratic government under which debates on key economic issues will be held in the Parliament instead of through hartals and blockades in the streets, when the movement of people and goods would come to a standstill in the country. And this democratic government will continue the efforts including economic reforms initiated by the present and past governments.

The extensive anticorruption drives have caused some fear and uncertainty within the business and investor community. However, the caretaker government has recognized this problem and is undertaking several measures to safeguard better business practices. A Better Business Forum was set up to facilitate systematic feedback from the private sector on major issues affecting private sector development. The caretaker government also formed a Regulatory Reforms Commission to streamline and upgrade the cumbersome business policies and regulations of the country. The initiative of setting up a Truth Commission is also encouraging. These have started to lift business confidence.

8.6. Challenges facing the country are also grave:

Bangladesh’s aspiration to become a middle income country by 2020 must be led by the private sector. A robust private sector is the key to attracting investment, entrepreneurship and technological innovation needed for quick economic growth. It is obvious that without private sector investment, jobs and economic opportunities for the thousands of people cannot be ensured. The government, therefore, needs to continuously invest in infrastructures and social development, and to further liberalize the policies and regulations and remove obstacles to inclusive growth and private sector driven development efforts.

The caretaker government has implemented many landmark governance reforms.

Unfortunately, one major reform that has remained untouched is the sluggish and complex bureaucratic structure of the Government. In my view, this is the mother of all other reforms.

The pyramid bureaucratic structure and its archaic systems and procedures, inherited from the colonial days, are characterized by inefficiency, centralization, lack of delegation and job description; too many tiers in the decision making process; archaic filing and noting system and lack of e-governance; and poor pay structure are out of place in the modern states. That is why it is incapable of implementing government’s own development projects, let alone promoting business and investment. We need to highlight this to the government for transforming this bureaucracy. Without its reforms, implementation target of development projects will always fall short and the vision of transforming Bangladesh into a middleincome country by 2020 may remain as an illusion.

8.7. Election will be held through implementation of reform proposals: The biggest grand rally in the memorable history of the 14 party alliance was held on Sept. 18, 2006 at Dhaka. As a part of the continuing mass movement for reforms of the caretaker government and election commission, it was declared in the meeting that if the alliance government hands over power retaining Justice K.M Hasan as the Chief of the Caretaker government and Justice M.A Aziz as the Chief of the Election Commission then continuous programmes will be observed. The leader of the opposition in the parliament and the president of the Awami League Sheikh Hasina in her presidential address said that we want a free and fair election under neutral caretaker government as per provision of article 58 of the constitution. But KM Hasan by visiting shrine at comilla accompanied by the BNP District General Secretary and party candidate has lent support to our claim that he is not a neutral person. From the grand rally Sheikh Hasina announced the programme of seize of

roads, railways and waterways on Sept. 20 and a dawn to dusk hartal (general strike) on Sept 21 and called upon the government to accept the reform proposals.

The Gonaforum president Dr. Kamal Hossain, Workers party president Rashed Khan Menon, JSD president Hasanual Huq Inu and leaders of Awami League and other parties addressed the grand rally.

To foil the grand rally the BNP-Jamat alliance government arrested thousands of Awami League leaders and workers as well as innocent people in Dhaka city and different districts right from a few days before the rally. Even on the day of rally the police and the party cadres of the government obstructed the transports coming to the rally from different districts.

Inspite of these arrests and obstacles, lacs of people attended the grand rally. The rally was held in a situation when Bangladesh is passing through an intricate transitional period of its history. If the ongoing principal demands of reforms of caretaker government and Election Commission raised by the 14 party alliance are not resolved, the impending election itself will be uncertain as a result of the government uncompromising attitude.

At one stage of the exchanges of letters between the parties an impasse was created. The ruling party has not also replied to the last letter of the opposition party. Secondly, the businessmen community has proposed a formula for dialogue between two principal parties, Awami League and BNP, at the level of General Secretaries. The ruling party has not shown any positive attitude in this regard also. On the other hand the Prime Minister Khaleda Zia in her recent various speeches in various recent public meetings has nullified any prospect for dialogue. By giving misleading statements that Awami League has been conspiring to foil election, she has shifted from her earlier stand for dialogue and understanding.

On the contrary Awami League has demanded explicitly for ensuring voting rights of people and for resolving political crisis through the free and fair election in constitutional way. But no blue print election under the BNP-Jamat alliance with Justice K M Hasan as the Chief Adviser of the Caretaker government and the present Election Commission under the leadership of Justice M A Aziz can be free, neutral and fair. The people of the country have doubt most reasonably about the updating of voter list. For all these reasons, it has been clearly stated from the opposition party that the people of the country will not accept any election without reforms.

8.8. Specific Recommendations: • Caretaker Government: The additional Advisers to the Caretaker Government should be appointed through a process of dialogue and consent between the major political parties.

• Violence: National and local authorities should urgently take steps to ensure a free and open political process in which all participants can operate without interference or fear of reprisal.

Confidence in the election process will increase if requests for rallies and meetings are routinely approved and all legislated political rights upheld.

A high-level committee should be formed in order to review police behavior before, during and after the election. The committee would be empowered to hear witnesses and make recommendations. Election monitors and human rights groups should be encouraged to play an important role in the prevention, documentation and investigation of political violence.

• Election Commission: Technical teams from the major political parties should discuss and resolve the following issues and frame the options for approval by the senior leaders of the respective parties: 1. The Voters’ List be electronically compiled and published in order to allow for a more extensive revision of the names. If this task is done expeditiously and transparently, then it will provide an opportunity for political parties and civil society to work cooperatively with the Election Commission to correct the Voters’ List. The Chief Election Commissioner should meet frequently with the political parties and civil society on this issue.

2. The Election Commission must update its regulatory campaign spending limits and put into place more effective audit procedures to enhance the enforceable spending limitations.

3. The Election Commission should move swiftly to put into place an impartial electoral complaint and appeal process. The Election Commission should publicize the penalties for violation of the laws related to the election process and be prepared to implement such penalties when appropriate.

4. Alleged violations of the law during the election campaign should be promptly investigated and prosecuted, and the results distributed widely to participants in the process and through the news media.

5. The Election Commission should publish on their Website detailed election results down to the polling station level. This undertaking will contribute to transparency and voter confidence, particularly if it is done within 24-48 hours after the end of voting. Such detailed information should also be made available to party poll agents, observers and the media in hard copy format immediately at the Election Commission in case there are problems with the Internet or the website.

6. The Election Commission should devise a streamlined process of accreditation that respects the right of domestic monitoring groups and international observers to monitor elections but is also cognizant of the responsibility of such monitors and observers not to contribute to difficulties of officials as they manage often congested polling centers.

7. The Election Commission should ensure that there are sufficient polling booths in the National and local authorities, the police agencies, the military forces, the political parties and civil society should discuss and devise strategies to curb the rampant violence that threatens to destabilize not just the electoral process but also society, itself.

CHAPTER-NINE Recommendation In Bangladesh, all the internal and external actors of politics, administration and development are emphasizing the need for good governance. A dramatic change has come in public administration and the paradigm shift towards good governance and sustainable developments. Day by day, the intellectuals, bureaucrats and civil society members are accepting the spirit of the concept and conceptualizing it in their own experience and environment because the actual picture of governance in our country does not prove to be good and satisfactory. Accountability of the government and the administration is at bay. The rule of law and a sound judicial system have not yet been ensured. Democratization and human rights are being disrupted in many ways.

9.1. Steps to solve political problems: Political problems are supposed to be the root cause of poor governance in Bangladesh. Because a political party who ultimately governs the country contains the following problems: There are more than 100 political parties in Bangladesh but very few of them have definite ideology or programme to be followed by supporters and future generations. Though one or two parties have ideologies and programmes, the leaders often defy them for their own gain.

Each major party is headed by a person who is omnipotent in the management of the party, including the formation of central and executive committees. The constitutions of most of the parties are absolutely monolithic in nature.

The basic reason behind almost all the problems is the illiterate and politically unconscious people behind the scene who are supplying the real force into the body polity of Bangladesh.

To get rid of this problem we need to make our people educated and politically conscious.

And to do that here again comes the question of dedicated leadership.

So for the sake of democracy in the country the following steps should be taken by leadersThe hereditary nature of leadership should be abolished and the party constitution should be amended to allow change in leadership after each specified term; The party structure and committees should be filled only by elections and this will encourage as well as develop leadership from the grassroots level. The post of party president and the leader of the parliamentary party should not be held by the same person. Ministers must be barred from holding any party office. This will ensure the entity of the party as an institution of democracy on one hand, and on the other, the party will be in a position to exercise a sort of control over the government or the parliamentary party so that they do not deviate from their party mandate or manifesto.

What is urgently needed now is to play an effective role by some of our MPs or political leaders who are really sincere, educated and devoted to the institutionalization of parliamentary democracy; they should from their respective parties, whenever and whatever way possible, consistently create a sort of genuine pressure so that Khaleda-Hasina cannot take any arbitrary or dictatorial actions to destroy democracy.

Although a lot of measures need to be taken for ensuring good governance. I hope, if sincere efforts can be taken for implementing the above-mentioned steps then good governance will be ensured. On the other extreme, the opposition, civil society and social groups and organizations also have the moral obligations to help and cooperate with the governments in this juncture.

From socio-economic point of view Bangladesh is an underdeveloped country. There is a plethora of problems like over-population and its rapid growth, illiteracy, poverty, diseases, malnutrition, unemployment etc. but almost all these problems have been created by our leaders. On the other hand, there are huge possibilities and factors in favor of industrialization and economic growth in the country. Many third world countries started their journey towards good governance and economic with fragile institutions as was in the case of Bangladesh. But these like Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia have been able to make success in a comparatively shorter period. But Bangladesh still lags behind. Despite the existence of all ample possibilities for both political and economic development we are still struggling because we couldn't get an honest and far-sighted leader who can guide the nation with devoted spirit into a proper direction. The Malaysian ex-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad is a classic example of a prudent and intelligent leader; he transformed Malaysia from rudimentary stage of this 'tiger' status ensuring good governance. Again, South Korea's economy was no better than ours in the 60s. Its per capita income was lower than that of Bangladesh in 1953. But by virtue of solid leadership skill, it has surpassed us long ago.

South Korea achieved tremendous development in General Chun du Huan's and Rae Tu's regime during 1980-93. Even then, Mr. Chun was not forgiven for his overwhelming corruption. He was sentenced to death. This is a good lesson for Bangladesh where public leaders work for their own gain and scot-free even after corruption.

9.2. Changes in Election Commission: The weakness of the Election Commission and its lack of independence have been so inherent and endemic that Bangladesh Constitution needed the 13th amendment in order to introduce provision for caretaker government. Besides the provision for caretaker government during the general elections there is also need for-An independent and neutral body having its credibility on its own right beyond any reproach; 1. Fund and budget of the EC; 2. Staff and personnel to be recruited by the commission itself; 3. Support to training institutes;

4. Improving voter education programmes; 5. Computerization of the electoral roll; 6. Independence of the media in the election process; 7. Strengthening the capacity of EC to enable it to perform its role effectively.

9.3. To Ensure the Good Governance: According to V.K. Chopra, good governance is, "a system of governance that is able to unambiguously identify the basic values of the society where values are economic, political and socio-culture issues including human rights, and pursue these values through an accountable and honest administration."

The elements of good governance are1. Accountability-both political and financial; 2. Transparency- both political and financial; 3. Enforcement of the rule of law, including fair and accessible legal and judicial system; 4. The promotion of democracy and open pluralistic societies; 5. The promotion of respect for human rights; 6. The promotion of independent media and the dissemination of information; 7. Anti-corruption initiatives; 8. Participation of citizens in decision making and implementation; 9. Citizen satisfaction; 10. Efforts to reduce excessive military expenditure; An overall caring and humane ambience promoting an equalitarian and equitous social and economic order. A World Bank booklet cogently summarized the major symptoms of poor governance. These are: - Failure to make a clear separation between what is public and what is private, hence, a tendency to direct public resources for private gain.

- Failure to establish a predictable framework of law and government behavior conducive to development or arbitrariness in the application of rule of laws.

- Executive rules, regulations, licensing requirements and so forth, which impede functioning of markets and encourage rent seeking.

- Priorities, inconsistent with development, resulting in a misallocation of resources - Excessively narrowly based or non-transparent decision making - Excessive costs; - Poor service to the public and; 9.4. The Way towards Good Governance in Bangladesh: My cogitation towards a good governing system in Bangladesh contains the following steps need to be taken immediately.

9.4.1. Enforcement of rule of law: To establish the rule of law in Bangladesh the following steps should be taken: Except the mode of appointment the independence of our higher judiciary is ensured. But the independence of lower judiciary, particularly of the magistrate courts is not ensured because these courts are run by the executive. So, to ensure its independence it should be separated from the executive.

The independence of other lower courts can be ensured by amending the Article 116 to the following effect: "The control (including the power of posting, promotion and grants of leave) and discipline of persons employed in the judicial service and judicial magistrates shall vest in the Supreme Court".

The Article 33 of Bangladesh Constitution allows the government to use the provision of preventive detention in peace time. As a result, a huge number of persons are detained every year without trial purely for political purpose. So this provision should be reformed to be applied only in time of emergency.

Article 93 of the Constitution allows the President to promulgate ordinances anytime during the recesses of parliament sessions. And in practice a huge number of ordinances are promulgated bypassing the parliament. Ordinance-made laws are fully undemocratic since they are made by the executive almost in an unrestricted way. These laws are, therefore, contrary to the concept of rule of law. So this provision is also needed to be reformed so that it cannot be used unless there occurs any emergency situation like national crisis, national calamity, severe economic deflation etc.

Article 141A of the Constitution empowers the president to declare emergency whenever he wishes. But by declaring emergency in peace time the government can suspend fundamental rights and suppress the opposition movement. This amounts to avow arbitrary exercise of power on the part of the government which is contradictory to the concept of rule of law. So this provision is also needed to be reformed, so that it can only be applied in war time situations only.

9.4.2 Reform in public administration and bureaucracy: To remove the difficulties and institutionalize this bureaucracy and make public administration accountable following measures should be taken immediately: 1. Standing committees on Ministries should be institutionalized and allowed to work independently in full swing so that the bureaucrats at every Ministry come under the direct of parliament.

2. The constitutional independence and autonomy for the CAG (Comptroller and AuditorGeneral) must be ensured so that it can independently work in the way to make bureaucrats accountable in respect of financial matter and to monitor their financial responsibilities; 3. A department of Ombudsman should immediately be created which will work as an alltime watchdog against maladministration, red-tapism and inefficiency in the bureaucracy;

4. Unconstitutional laws dealing with the functions and formation of constitutional bodies like CAG, PSC, local government, EC etc must be replaced by democratic laws allowing them to independently in furtherance of better administrative accountability.

The larger the government, the wider is its reach. The wider the reach of the executive, more the likelihood of public harassment; more the likelihood of bureaucratic corruption.

Government has, therefore should be shrunk; in the present context where multi-national foreign investment is involved in the exploration of oil and gas, and the generation of power, there cannot be any justification for restricting our own private sector from importing and distributing various products like petroleum etc. monopolies such as BPC (Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation) which bring no public benefit should be abolished. There are many other instances where the state must be sold back. Reduction in state intervention should be the prime principle of reform. Whenever possible government executive should be branched out to agencies and the private sector is allowed to participate in creating a competitive atmosphere.

The functioning of the PSC must be strengthened and it should be chaired by an expert opposition MP particularly one who had been previously a Finance Minister. Proper functioning of the PSC will ensure the financial responsibility of bureaucrats in every ministry. Reports of the PSC must be dealt with a standing committee as in parliament and the compliance of the commission's report must be ensured through the scrutiny of the committee system. To control delegated law making by the bureaucrats a standing committee should be set up and a instrument act should be made.

9.4.3. Institutionalizing local government: To institutionalize local government following initiatives should be takenĂ˜ In accordance with the provisions of Article 11, 59 and 60 of the Constitution local government institutions should be set up for ensuring people's participation. Ă˜ Every tier of local government should be autonomous and maximum devolution of power to be made to the local government; Local government’s institutions should be made free from government interference except audit and inceptions of funds provided by the governments;

In accordance with the provisions in Article 59(1) of the Constitution the local government administrations and officials must be vested in control of the local government and not under the control of the central government as present provision provide, because a centralized administration tends by nature to be more bureaucratic; The term of office of chairman of local bodies should be reduced to 2 years instead of 5 years to make the office of chairman less attractive to moneyed candidates, but more attractive to dedicated persons.

9.5. Some Measures Related to Election: A. Support to Disclosure Provisions under RPO (1972) The CTG will need to provide necessary institutional support to the Election Commission as it proceeds to implement different disclosure provisions contained in the Representation of People Order (RPO) (1972) and in its subsequent amendments. These provisions include, on the one hand, electoral financing and expenditure related issues and, on the other hand, background information on the candidates. For example, the NBR will have to cooperate on ascertaining the information submitted on asset and liability of the prospective candidate to the Election Commission; Bangladesh Bank will have to confirm the candidates loan repayment status; utility providing agencies will have to certify that the candidate has paid all his dues on account of telephone, gas, electricity, water, etc. The Auditor and Comptroller General’s office will have to do capacity building work to help the Election Commission to process the financial statements submitted by the candidates. b. Beneficiaries of Tax Amnesty It may be recalled that a special tax amnesty scheme was implemented during FY06 which allowed people to declare their unaccounted wealth and get it legalised by paying tax at the rate of 7.5 per cent instead of the highest rate of 25 per cent. It has been reported that more than 7,000 tax payees took advantage of this scheme and declared unaccounted wealth amounting more than Tk. 4,000 crore. The NBR has, till date understandably declined to divulge the identity of these privileged people. However, in the interest of fair play in election financing, it is perfectly logical to demand that the NBR publishes, from the full list of people who took advantages of tax amnesty in FY06, only name of these people who will be participating in the upcoming national election. c. Bank Account for Election Expenses

The total amount of money which will be transacted in connection with the elections is anybody’s guess. However, with a view to streamline these expenditures, the CTG, through the Election Commission, has to ensure that the candidates open a mandatory bank account to finance their respective election expenses. This measure will not only bring in more transparency in election financing, but will also discourage credit expansion in private sector, facilitating implementation of a cautions monetary policy. Such a measure may protect the PCB (D) from shadow election financing, while there remains a cap on the volume on advances to be made by the NCBs. 9.6. Concluding Remarks: While the BOP remains in a comfortable state, some strains are showing up in public finance system. The CTG needs to keep a watchful eye on the external sector transactions, but it will be imperative on its part to reduce expenditure and increase revenue collection to relax the pressure on fiscal balance. Indeed, for that matter, the economy in the coming months will have to be stabilised at a lower equilibrium. The major test of macroeconomic management of the CTG will be in December 2006 when it will have to account for all the performance indicators agreed under the PRGF loan document. Although Bangladesh missed a number of these targets in September 2006, this did not matter since those were not binding. In fact, the CTG will have to make up for that part to meet the half-yearly indicators.

The Finance Advisor will have to take a close and fresh look at the pre-determined spending priorities as well as at the ongoing reform agenda. He will also have to consider some creative steps to make a contribution in improving the prospect of a free and fair election. In this context, we trust that he and his colleagues of the Economic Affairs sub-committee of the Council of Advisors will consider the proposals contained in this document.

The CPD ED summed up the recommendations of the dialogue which included carrying out joint media investigations on border conflicts, water, migration and cross-border insurgency.

He added that eminent writers and scholars from both the countries can write columns on bilateral issues regularly in major newspapers of both the countries. The recommendation also included providing the young journalists by part time job to felicitate exchange of expertise and experience. He urged the journalists to write more about visa restrictions which they often face and added that major literary works of the two countries could be translated.

On electronic media the dialogue suggested establishment of an electronic news agency within South Asia and to explore ways which will enable Bangladeshi satellite TV programmes could be broadcasted in India.

Four organisations of Bangladesh and India -- Writer's Ink and Shadhona of Bangladesh and Sanskriti and India International Centre of India -- also announced formation of 'Indo-Bangla Cultural Initiative Co-chair of the session Dev Mukharji said that there are off course some tribulations between the two neighbours. But there is hardly any tribulation that cannot be resolved through dialogues. He termed the tribulations as psychological and was not objective.

The Advisor noted that media has special responsibility and said that media was an asset in the South Asia which had helped render the societies so intensely pluralist. He stressed that common cultural ethos can be promoted through creating conditions for media of Bangladesh and India. He suggested for ensuring free and unimpeded flow of information between the countries, upgrading infrastructural facilities, especially in the ICT sector, promoting networking and syndication arrangements between the press and media of both countries, increasing the frequency of contacts and visits by the media people both at governmental and private levels. CPD Chairman Rehman Sobhan presided over the closing session.

What we have is government paralysis, corruption and a general worsening of basic civilised conditions of life. The irony of the situation is the confrontation between the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, which constitutes the core of the current ruling alliance, and the Awami League, the biggest opposition party. The conflict is not over how best to defend the interests of the teeming millions of poor, but how best to defend this or that clique within the ruling elite. To the masses this conflict is an alien one and that is shown by the recurrence of hartals (general strikes). The masses are thirsting for real change, not cosmetic changes at the top.

All the masses see is an inefficient public administration and a corrupt judicial system. Low pay to public servants is also a major reason for widespread corruption, not just at the top. It becomes a way of surviving in a brutal society. What the masses see in the field of education and healthcare is no different either. The overall quality of education in the country has deteriorated to such an extent that every year the so-called elites send their children to

schools abroad. But, apart from those who feel they can reap a big economic benefit by going back, very few of them return to the country. Healthcare is so inadequate and antiquated that those who can pay always seek healthcare outside the country. In the midst of this general decline, we see the crime rate shooting up. It has risen so much that in 2002 the government felt obliged to deploy the army to combat petty crime! But evidently that made little difference as the crime rate in the country has continued to rise day by day.

CHAPTER-TEN Conclusion The caretaker government has completed its tenure of 2 years after holding the general election on 29th December 2009 and taking of the oath by the ministers of the new government. But the exit of the caretaker government was silent and the farewell was nonceremonial. We have seen the advisers had their farewell meeting in their respective ministries in small scale and the advisers meet together to present bouquet to the Chief Adviser Dr. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed and had a last talk together in the office of the Chief Adviser. The exit of the caretaker government was virtually overshadowed by the vibrant beginning of the new political government.

There was not much discussion on the exit of the CTG in the media. But the way of exit of the caretaker government was always a concern for the advisers and also for citizens and politicians.

The strategy of the caretaker government was also moulded to a safe exit of the government in the second year. The initial all aggressive military approach of the CTG was changed to more diplomatic civilian appraoch of the government. An Adviser of the Government in the 2nd year should be appreciated for his cool and calculative negotiating ability, Dr. Hussain Zillur Rahman, Who was ably supported by his other colleagues of the Advisory Council? He proves the skeptic wrong about his ability one of whom is Professor Anwer Hossain, the General Secretary of DUTA who had to be in Jail accused in connection of the university violence in 2007 who in his memoir told that HJR would be the worst selection as an adviser.

The exit was silent, but is it safe? Question of safety also discussed among the public and politicians alike. Many politicians and talk show ‘experts’ raised the question and always kept CTG on alert. The win of AL is a response of the public which may ensure the honor and safety of the advisors, atleast for the time being.

When the present caretaker government came to power on the backdrop of 1/11 everyone was delighted and all were relieved of the tension of conflicting election and its consequences.

The new government declared its objectives of conducting a free fair election acceptable to all and a society free from corruption.

All were in peaceful mood. But the mood changes when the government started to arrest the political leaders, beau crates and businessmen on the charge of the corruption. Initially BNP men were arrested in greater number, but later few AL leaders were arrested. And afterwards in the middle of drama AL chief Hasina, then BNP chief Khalaeda were arrested on charge of corruption.

The political parties fall apart from the government, businessmen felt insecure and beaucrates felt scare.

The consecutives food hit Bangladesh and submerged 1/3 rd of the country in the middle of 2007. Government had to face lone battle against the flood with out the participation from the political parties. Then the incident of Dhaka University, Government had to impose the Curfew over the emergency rule to tackle the situation and to prevent spread to other parts of the country.

Then came the Sidr, the most devastating cyclone so far in the area which cost thousands of lives and make the economy of the area totally dead. Govt had to make people survived by special food arrangement. The political parties only negligibly participated.

And throughout the tenure, the government had to fight with the price hike of the essentials, the legacy of which is still continuing.

Now, when the government started dialogue, the political parties are showing very lukewarm response, especially the big parties are still reluctant to sit with the government until the two top leaders are not allowed to participate in the talk and in the election.

So far, no care taker government had to face so many obstacles from the political parties, not to say of the businessmen.

Questions about the constitutional legality of the government also came up. Our constitution only permits a Care taker government for three months. It would have to complete its task of arranging a free fair election by this time. This government is staying over 1 year and will continue for 2 years, the length which is not liked my many political parties. This government also made some reforms in some constitutional bodies including PSC, EC, and Judiciary etc.

These constitutional reforms would need the approval by parliament.

Would it have been safe for a caretaker government to be limited within three months because of its constitutional bar and political difficulties? Would it have been wise for the present political government to be limited within 3 months and be aimed for a fair election only? Would it not wise for the CTG to make amendments in the laws and not go after the corrupts physically? Would it not be enough for Bangladesh to have a free and fair election?

Didn’t the government create a complexity of the situation by itself and create a burden which would be difficult for them to dispose off?

The present caretaker government has taken upon itself a daunting task which proved to be difficult so far and will the government able to come out of the conglomerate safely and cleanly?

It is true that if the objectives of the present caretaker government is fulfilled and the government become successful, it will be a historical achievement for Bangladesh and for its democracy.

BIBLIOGRAPHY I. The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.

II. The Constitution of Bangladesh- Volume-II.A.K.M Samsul huda III . Constitution, Constitutional Law and Politics: Bangladesh Perspective-by Md. Abdul Halim IV. Law Journals V. Masdar Hossain Case: 2000 BLD (AD) 104

VI. Sources of Internet: 1. http://www.aliran.com/oldsite/high9910b.htm3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caretaker_government 4. www. Banglapedia: Caretaker Government 5. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 6. http://www.answers.com/topic/caretaker 7. http://dictionary.babylon.com/Caretaker%20government%20of%20Bangladesh 8. http://www.sydneybashi-bangla.com/Articles/Harun_Caretaker%20government.pdf 9.http://www.google.com.bd/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=20&url=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.netherlandsembassydhaka.org%2Fnewpdf%2Feconomic%2520update%2520April %252708%2520%2520May %252708.pdf&ei=WLOGSozZJ5WENsCk5fsO&rct=j&q=Criticism+of+the+Caretaker+Gov erment+in+Bangladesh&usg=AFQjCNGY_0HVBuR5Y_fOiMyGNrRff9fcMg 10.

http://bdoza.wordpress.com/2008/05/23/reviewing-the-objectives-of-the-present-

caretaker-government-of-bangladesh/ 11. http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/C_0041.htm 12. http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/C_0041.htm 13. http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/H_0136.htm 14. http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/C_0041.htm 15.

http://bdoza.wordpress.com/2008/05/23/reviewing-the-objectives-of-the-present-

caretaker-government-of-bangladesh/.

16. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caretaker_government_of_Bangladesh 17. http://bangladeshweb.net/Main.asp? Year Month=200610.

18. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070324204408AA2dKDx. 19. http://www.thedailystar.net/2006/10/29/d6102901109.htm.

20. http://bangladeshweb.net/Main.asp?YearMonth=200612.

21. http://bangladeshweb.net/Main.asp?YearMonth=200611.

22. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caretaker_government_of_Australia.

23.http://74.125.95.132/search? q=cache:6zDztkyb0PEJ:www.webbangladesh.com/history_culture/history_politicalcondition. htm+Constitutional+Aspects+of+the+Caretaker+Government&cd=16&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=b d.

24. http://bila-bd.com/link%20pages/publications_view.php?pid=6.

25.http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:RpnBIr7PwXcJ:atcapital.com/index.php%3Foption %3Dcom_content%26task%3Dview%26id%3D28%26Itemid %3D53+Constitutional+Aspects+of+the+Caretaker+Government&cd=20&hl=en&ct=clnk& gl=bd 26. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caretaker_government27. http://www.webbangladesh.com/history_culture/history_politicalcondition.htm. Last 28. www. Banglapedia: Caretaker Government29.http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:9gE3eASiXuMJ:www.albd.org/autoalbd/index.php %3Foption%3Dcom_content%26task%3Dview%26id%3D100%26Itemid %3D37+Functions+of+the+Caretaker+Government+in+Bangladesh&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk &gl=bd 30.http://74.25.95.132/search? q=cache:DSGgzMMm7IcJ:unheardvoice.net/blog/2007/09/12/hrw-report-on-bangladesh/ +Activities+of+the+Caretaker+government-2006+in+Bgladesh

cd=

10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=bd.

31.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:ZS2KQkhJC3wJ:www.thefinancialexpress-

bd.com/search_index.php%3Fnews_id%3D33057%26page %3Ddetail_news+Criticism+of+the+Caretaker+Government+in+Bangladesh&cd=1&hl=en& ct=clnk&gl=bd.

32.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:23jgVG31jt4J:asiafoundation.org/in-

asia/2009/02/11/reflections-on-the-bangladeshi-national-and-localelections/+Parliament+ Election+and+Caretaker+Government+in+Bangladesh-1991&cd=14&hl=en&ct=clnk.

33.http://74.125.95.132/search? q=cache:QGTMUqLFCIJ:www.sonarbangladesh.com/article.php%3FID %3D571+Criticism+of+the+Caretaker+Government+in+Bangladesh&cd=10&hl=en&ct=cln k&gl=bd.

34. http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:lbtpUzQ9v5kJ:www.marxist.com/bangladesh-crisiscaretaker-government170107.htm+Parliament+Election+and+Caretaker Government+in+Bangladesh-1991&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk 35.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:IUE0nYxRGbcJ:www.bei-bd.org/newslett/

cg/0208/art12.htm+Criticism+of+the+Caretaker+Government+in+Bangladesh&cd=7&hl=en &ct =clnk&gl=bd 36.http://74.125.95.132/search? q=cache:Xvl1QwrkxiMJ:www.dhakacourier.net/issue19/report/doc1.html+Criticism+of+the +Caretaker+Government+in+Bangladesh&cd=14&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=bd 37. http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:mNTD-jy8CuYJ:www.bd64. com /today1. Php %3 Fid%

3D8028+Caretaker+Government-1996+in+Bangladeh&cd=3&hl=

en&ct=clnk&gl=bd.

38. Gopal.Sengupta http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2009/07/29/news0276.htm.

39.http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:3Vch9UmWMwJ:www.bdnews24.com/details.php %3Fcid%3D3%26id %3D90830+Criticism+of+the+Caretaker+Goverment+in+Bangladesh&cd=9&hl=en&ct=cln k&gl=bd.

40.http://74.125.95.132/search? q=cache:WU7RTxq8W_kJ:www.saag.org/common/uploaded_files/paper2143.html+Caretake r+Government+and+Election+Comission&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk.

41. www. The Daily Star.net 42. http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=95481#comments.

43.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:-KFL7Q31S24J:www.e-bangladesh.org

/

2008/03/16/speaker-jamiruddin-sircar-dubs-the caretakergovernment/+Functions+ of+the+ Caretaker+Government+in+ Bangladesh&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=d.

44.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:B-fxBNHBJcYJ:www.theindependent

bd.com

/details.php%3Fnid %3D120773+Caretaker+Government+in+Religious+aspect+in+Bangladeh&cd

=1&hl=

en&ct=clnk&gl=bd.

45.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:FHr2LqnkggsJ:bdpolitics.com/bangladesh-govt-

watch/bangladesh-vision-2021.html+Effect+to+the+Political+System

+By+

Caretaker+

Government +in+Bangladesh &cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=bd.

46.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:mNTD-jy8CuYJ:www.bd64.com/today1.

php

%3Fid%3D8028+Caretaker+Government-1996+in+Bangladeh&cd=3&hl= en&ct=clnk&gl=bd.

47. http://www.theindependent-bd.com/details.php?nid=131688.

48.http://www.google.com.bd/#hl=en&q=Effect+to+the+Political+System+By+Caretaker+G overnment+in+Bangladesh&btnG=Google+Search&meta=cr %3DcountryBD&aq=f&fp=30ac49c36f657303.

49. com

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:eyUyXNj53GwJ:www.thefinancialexpress-bd. /2007/

08/11/74

17.html+13th+amendment+

in+Bangladesh&cd=10&hl=en&ct=

clnk&gl=bd.

50.

http://bdoza.wordpress.com/2008/05/23/reviewing-the-objectives-of-the-present-

caretaker-government-of-bangladesh/.

50.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:ZS2KQkhJC3wJ:www.thefinancialexpress-

bd.com/search_index.php%3Fnews_id%3D33057%26page %3Ddetail_news+Criticism+of+the+Caretaker+Government+in+Bangladesh&cd=1&hl=en& ct=clnk&gl=bd.

51. http://www.cpd-bangladesh.org/activities/indo_bangla_rgdlg.html.

52.http://74.125.95.132/search? q=cache:zevFI5TQbQJ:bdoza.wordpress.com/2009/01/14/silent-exit-of-the caretaker govt/ +Conclusion+of+the+Study+of+the+Caretaker BANGLADESH&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=bd.

+Government+in+