State of emergency never reflects democracy

In today’s Bangladesh, most talked about issues are the release of imprisoned political leaders, Upazila Parishad (sub district council) election, total withdrawal of the state of emergency and finally a free and fair, credible parliamentary election that is acceptable to all stake holders.

On August 16, 2008, Bangladesh Awami League (AL) leader and former home minister Mohammad Nasim was released on bail but remained at LabAid Hospital, a posh private medical center, as he was severely ill, a prisons official said. AL and his family members were in a strong move for the release of ailing Nasim, who was convicted for graft charge. Deputy Inspector General of Prisons Shamsul Haider Siddiqui told to the media persons that Nasim was released in line with a High Court order.

Rezaul Karim, Nasim's younger brother, told to the press that he remains in the hospital for now, and will go abroad later for better medical treatment. The authorities removed prison guards from the AL leader's room shortly after 12 noon. Earlier, on August 6, 2008, the High Court had granted four months' bail to Nasim, who was hospitalised on June 24 following a stroke.

The issue of the release of former Prime Minister and Chairperson of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Khaleda Zia and her elder son Tareque Rahman is almost an everyday event to be talked by the press, BNP leaders and advisors of military backed interim government. BNP leaders demanding unconditional release of their supremo, while advisors are telling that the issue is on the track and going through process.

Meanwhile, on the release issue of party-leaders, BNP-declared ultimatum has passed the last moment and the party went for a soft program like giving memorandum to the government on August 21, and going to observe human chain program on 27th of this month. Both the parties, the government and the politicians, are hopeful that they could be reached at a win-win situation on this issue in near future.

Upazila election is the deeper problem and more important issue for the government and the political parties as well. Government including Election commission (EC) intending to hold Upazila election in October next through a non political character. But a court order makes it difficult and in consideration of this stage, political parties have got an upper hand on the issue.

Another consideration must be taken into account that whether BNP would be in the process or not. As a matter of fact, AL finally would be in the Upazila election process; because in last election AL is the absolute gainer. The influence of this gain Upazila level AL leaders are enthusiastic to join the local poll. To maintain order in the party AL leadership may be forced to take decision in favour of joining in Upazila election.

BNP, as a party, not yet has the strength to face a nationwide local body poll with 482 units. In this consideration they might be boycott the poll. If so, government has only the tool to push BNP in election and dialogue process is the release issue of Khaleda Zia, Tareque Rahman and other party leaders, who are in jail for corruption charges. Any way the government advisors are confident enough that they would be able to take BNP in the process of Dialogue and Election in proper time.

Most important issue for Bangladesh is the total withdrawal of the State of Emergency. Very recently AL and BNP separately said, they would not take part in any elections under the state of emergency. The parties express their opinion when the British high commissioner, Stephen Evans, met the Acting AL president, Zillur Rahman, and the BNP secretary general, Khandaker Delwar Hossain, in their houses.

Zillur, after the meeting, told the press they had informed Evans of their position on the state of emergency and discussed the latest political situation and essentials price spiral. Delwar said ‘We told him we would not participate in any elections under the state of emergency. We also told him, BNP is an election-oriented party and is eager to contest the polls, but the behavior of the government indicates it is not willing to hold free and fair elections.”

After the meetings, Evans said the issue of the state of emergency was raised by both the parties. After the meeting with Zillur, British High Commissioner said, ‘All should think now whether dialogue can be held between the political parties and the government to talk about the way of lifting the state of emergency.’ After the meeting with Delwar, High Commissioner said, BNP emphasized its position of lifting the state of emergency and he noted the fact that the chief adviser has been speaking publicly about the gradual lifting of the provision of the state of emergency.

‘More talks are needed to find out ways how emergency can be gradually lifted,’ Evans told media persons. He also stated that the process of lifting the state of emergency is very much a matter of the Bangladesh government. He noted that the political parties would need to be the centre of all processes of all democratic countries, including Bangladesh.

In the mean time, the demand for the withdrawal of State of Emergency came out from the Rights organization that is the powerful part of civil society. Civil Society was the strong supporter of this military backed interim government when this government came in to state power on January 11, 2007.

ODHIKAR, an organization concentrating on Rights issues, maintaining its critical position against holding elections under the state of emergency said, elections under emergency are contradictory to the principle of democracy and human rights. Such elections would discourage the people from participating and would fail to create an enabling democratic environment.

The statement of ODHIKAR, in true sense, is the voice of many civil society organisations. In consideration of the voice of political parties, civil society organisations and of course the voice of mass, state of emergency should go a way as soon as possible. State of Emergency never reflects the norms of human rights, democracy and society of freedom in terms of opinion, knowledge and information.

It should be mentioned that the state of emergency was enforced in Bangladesh in an instable political situation. Of course, the people of the country are not willing to go back to that type of politics. But it is the hard truth that the state of emergency was enforced to make Bangladesh a democracy in real séance. Now, as the political parties, civil society organisations and others involved are saying that the state of emergency would be contradictory to a credible and acceptable general election, authorities should accept the impression that could lead Bangladesh to democracy within the time line declared by Chief Advisor of the government.