CC BY
26СОЦИОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ
OBSTRUCTIONS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: A CASE STUDY ON BANGLADESH Md S.I.
Md Sazedul Islam - Postgraduate Student, DEPARTMENT OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS, PEOPLE'S FRIENDSHIP UNIVERSITY, MOSCOW
Abstract: Вangladesh is a developing country of South East Asia. Though after the independence in 1971, west minister parliamentary democratic system was adopted in the country but due to the different political situations the parliament and the government failed to ensure democracy. The democracy of Bangladesh was in more crisis during the army ruling period which was lasted for 16 years. In 1991 democracy was restored by establishing parliamentary system. From the historical evidence it is noteworthy that all the ruing party of the country attempted to prolong their power and the opposition contributed to crate an ineffective parliament by boycotting the parliament. This conflict for gaining power by the political parties has created an undemocratic political culture which is the main obstruction to vindicate a fruitful democratic parliamentary system in Bangladesh. In this article the Author analyzes the major obstacles to establish a healthy democracy in Bangladesh with the help of historical method.
Keywords: democracy, parliament, political party, boycott, political conflict.
The term democracy is derived from the Greek words, demos and Kratos, the former meaning the people and the latter power. Democracy thus means power of the people. It is now regarded as a form of government in which the people rule themselves either directly, or indirectly through their representatives. Definition of democracy, as a form of government, are various, But like many other definitions in political science, they differ in their contents and applications [11].Democracy, according to the Greeks, is the Government in which people rule over themselves.
Aristotle considered it as a perverted form of government. Herodotus says, the democracy denotes that form of government in which in the ruling power of the state is largely vested in the members of the community as a whole. In the words of President Abraham Lincoln, it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people [3].As a whole we can say that democracy is a form of government in which the citizen of the country take part in the government directly or indirectly and become the source of all sovereignty power of the country.
Before the beginning of this global movement towards democracy there were about 40 countries that could be with some degree of conventionality attributed to democratic. The number of them has gradually increased, as in the late 1970s and early 1980s, a number of countries authoritarian (mostly military) to democratic rule. However, In the mid-1990s, the pace of democracy spread across the planet have accelerated, and to the present moment there are from 76 to 117 democracies (how many it is determined by the counting system) [16].
According to Ali Riaz, Some indicators who estimate the quality of the democracy in a country. They are
1) Rights of vote of the general people.
2) Freedom of speech and organizations.
3) Competitive fair and impartial election [4].
Besides these basic principles of a healthy democracy are liberty, equality, fraternity, fundamental rights of the people, independence of judiciary, written constitution. By analyzing these principles we can conjecture the position of a country in practicing democracy.
The obstructions of the healthy democracy in Bangladesh
Bangladesh emerged as an independent state in 1971, after nearly two centuries of British rule and a further quarter century of Pakistani rule. Substantially, there were mainly two reasons to combat for the independence and to vindicate democracy of the people of Bangladesh (former East Pakistan) First, because the Bengali language, spoken today by more than 90% of the country's population, was discriminated against by Islamabad (the capital of Pakistan). Secondly, the lion's share of the region's income was spent, as they said at the time, in the main, i.e. in the Western, Pakistan [17]. After independence, the new constitution, which was promulgated in 1972, adopted a parliamentary system of government reflecting the aspirations of the people who had struggled to achieve such a democratic system since the British colonial days [6] Bangladesh adopted the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy [12].
Actually post independence period the scenario of the parliament was frustrating. The system, however, was replaced in quick succession by authoritarianism single party system .In 1972 the constitution of Bangladesh was approved and then in1973,7 March the first election was held and the party Awami league who led the liberation war got 293 seats out of 300 seats. Majority members of the parliament were belong to Awami league and therefore, there was absence of a strong opposition party. The president Sheikh Mujibur Rahman banned all political parties declaring to create only one party named BAKSHAL. The situation became more worst after killing the president Sheikh Mujibur Rahman by an army coup in 1975 on 15 August [2].
The democracy of Bangladesh had crossed a critical period from 1975 to 1990 because of the emergence of army ruling. Finally Although democracy was restored by establishing parliamentary system in 1990 by overthrowing dictatorship army ruling but because of the controversial activities, lust for holing power, hostile behavior to each other, impatience and boycotting parliament by the political parties have created an undemocratic situation in the country. The people of Bangladesh have been struggling a lot to establish democracy and justice since the birth of Bangladesh but till now the people are deprived to have a healthy democracy due to some major obstacles.
Firstly ,Army ruling: As we notice some of the main findings of this army ruling period, Firstly that parliament was without opposition and the ruling army chief was the source of all power as the president of the country. None of the (four) parliaments elected in the first two decades of independence (1971-90) could complete its five-year term; an average parliament survived slightly more than half (29 months) of its five-year term. All four parliaments were dissolved prematurely either by the military or under popular pressure. None of the parliaments also enjoyed the legitimacy needed to become an effective institution. Part of the reason was the way it was elected rather than the manner it worked. All four parliamentary elections were alleged to have been rigged. Besides, the second and third elections were held under military rule; these were intended mostly to legitimize the military rule respectively of General Ziaur Rahman and General Hossain Mohammad Ershad, who together ran the country from 1975 to 1990. Both Generals adopted an almost similar policy to party-building, with Zia establishing the Bangladesh National party BNP and Ershad patronizing the creation of Jatiya Party (JP), to mobilize support for their regimes both inside parliament and outside of it [ 14]. The result of the election was always rejected by the opposition because of the absence of transparency ,no other election was so biased like the election during the regime of Ershad.
Secondly, power is centered in one hand: In army regime power was confined in the president as an army ruler. After then the two major parties Bangladesh National party and Awami league introduced prime minister ruling government by inducting parliamentary system from presidency regime. Now the prime minister has become the all sources of
99
power. The prime minister of the country plays role as a prime minister ,chief of the parliamentary committees as well as the chairperson of the political party which provides unbridled power in one person [4] In side the party there is absence of democracy as all the decisions are taken by one person. Similarly democracy can not reach to the local members as the absence of decentralization of power [5].
Thirdly, tendency to prolong power by rigged election: Election and democracy are the main pillar of a modern democratic politics. The system of election is the main mechanism that ensures governing elites to remain accountable to their electorate but also to accentuated legitimacy crisis for many regimes. From the political history of Bangladesh we can say that each and every ruling president or party took attempt to prolong their power either by rigged election or by the amendment of the constitution [13].Notably Bangladesh could be portrayed as a typical case where regimes suffered credibility and legitimacy due to rigged elections ,used violence and force to win election, lack of elections and periodic intervals, etc. However for this reason to ensure fair election and democracy in 1991 an unique system was namely caretaker government has been established. It is because none of the parties do not trust one another. Especially the opposition party always demand to organize the election by someone who is neutral and involved with the ruling parties. This caretaker system of government took a better scope through constitutional modification in 1996 [8]. After coming in the power in 2008 the ruling party Awami league canceled the caretaker government system by the amendment of the constitution and organized the election of 10th parliament. Demanding restatement of the neutral caretaker government system to oversee the elections in order to ensure free and fair elections Bangladesh national party did not contest in the election [7]. Half of the parliamentary seats were uncontested and Awami league won 80% parliamentary seats, Jatio party led by Ershad became the opposition in the parliament, voter turnout was a record law 40% because of the boycott and violence. Only on the election day 21 were died 553 school based polling centers were burnt, the election commission suspended voting in 597 polling stations due to violence. Ain o Salish Kendra a human rights organization based in Dhaka reported over 500 deaths before the election in 2013 and only in January 2014, 62 people were died [15].
Fourthly, corruption and avoid of accountability: From the case study of Bangladesh we can say acquisition of power by the majority which promotes an aptitude to avoid accountability. In the parliament culture of boycott by the opposition encourages to arbitrariness of the ruling party. Unlike some democratic countries, where contain some constitutional institution which are responsible to control the power of the elected person, even if necessary they are able to take disciplinary and correctional steps. From the experience of Bangladesh political parties always has created obstacle to establish these institution. For example, to rein of the corrupted leaders ,anti corruption commission was founded in (2001-2006) but this commission could not be efficient because of the influence of the ruling party. Alike this, creating of a human rights commission is always denied by the ruling party [4].
Fiftly, Absence of rule of law and weakness of judiciary: Is is noticed by the political history of Bangladesh that most of the ruling party attempted to impose authoritarian power on judiciary. It is happened either by appointing judges and officials or by dismissing the previous judges. Thus the ruling power creates their offspring in the judiciary [4].In fact, it has become a tradition that Judiciary system is used by the ruling parties to suppress the opposition. Opposition are often victim of harassment, humiliation ,litigation and injustice.
Sixthly, Mass media plays very important role to explain the democratic condition in a country. Mass media observe and express the activities of the government. Controlling opposition mass media by the ruling party has become a common culture in Bangladesh. In the country confrontation and depreciation are always intolerable. Therefore, opposition mass media and newspaper are controlled and in some cases they are banned. Generally the state media are used to promulgate their success and try to hide their failures [9].
Seventhly, the factors which obstructed the democracy of the parliament, one of them is political impatience . Most of this intolerance has been turned into conflict which is not confined in the political areas but also it is presented in the parliament. As a result parliament become a dysfunctional institution. Due to the political conflict and the lack of constructive politics the most crucial issues of the development of the country and problematic issues are being neglected in the parliament. The political process is hampered by the culture of conflict in the place of issue based political competition. This political conflict creates a division among the total population which influence top to the bottom level of the people, even it affects the civil society. This damages the possibilities of compromise and create an unrest political situation [1].
Eightly, politicized civil society: Civil society is considered to represent the public voice and influence the process of achieving and maintaining democracy by acting at the national and grassroots levels. In Bangladesh civil society organizations are found to be successful and active in micro credit, women empowerment and social development sectors. But the most civil society organization both modern types such as development oriented non governmental organizations and conventional types such as professional groups, trade unions and citizens groups are politicized and co opted by the major political parties. Due to this co option civil society organizations fail to function autonomously in their interactions with the state, whether in acts of cooperation or of negotiation .Civil society often compromises its ability to monitor the state and politics .In most cases they became compelled to come to such situations just to survive ,achieve their primary organizational objectives or earn personal gains for their leaders [10].
Conclusion
After the independence of Bangladesh the country has gained the democratic constitution. Parliamentary democracy was established by the provisional constitution order 1972.The center of the power was based on the parliament . But this situation turned into authoritarian by termination multi party system and creating only one party in the country in 1975, on 25 January. In past 47 years ,Bangladesh achieved only 27 years of democratic regimes, 6 years of semi army ruling and 9 years of army autocratic ruling. Here democracy has destroyed by the army rulers as well as the elected representations. It is noteworthy that a long battle did occur between democratic forces and undemocratic elements in the vast canvas of the history of Bangladesh. After a huge sacrifice presented by the brave people rediscovered the track of democracy at the beginning of 1990s. Particularly two of our political parties who were in the power in different times. At the beginning of them were involved in struggle of restoring of democracy but finally they were more intended to gain power. Two of these parties have the similar ideology of enmity and confrontation to one another where national reconciliation and unity is absent. From the historical experience we can say that in Bangladesh the democracy has become weak due to the political conflict, intolerance, boycotting parliament, lust for holing power, lack of decentralization of power ,corruption and so on. The ruling party always try to prolong their power and the opposition take attempt to get the power ,this tendency create a political conflict .Most often this conflict turns into a violence which violates the human rights and contributes to rise undemocratic environment. Unless establishing an effective parliament, independent and dynamic election commission, anti corruption commission, judiciary and civil society as well as tolerance and respect to each other ,the power of a healthy democracy will not be established in Bangladesh.
References
1. Al Masud Hasanuzzaman, Parliamentary terminology in Bangladesh [in bengali
language] // Daily prothom Alo, 2012. [Electronic resource]. URL: archive.prothom-
alo.com/detail/date/2012-03-24/news/234931/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
2. Ahmed Sharif. Development: democracy, election and development [in bengali language] // Bhorer kagoj,2015. [Electronic resource]. URL: bhorerkagoj.net/print-edition/2015/07/16/42498.php/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
3. Agarwal R.C., 1991. Political Theory. New Dellhi: S. Chand & Company Ltd.
4. Ali Riaz. Democracy of Bangladesh: nature, feature and future [In Bengali language] // Daily Prothom Alo, 5 April, 2017. [Electronic resource]. URL: prothomalo. com/protichinta/article/113-faRBi-tf-»R^ -part-2. (date of access: 07.04.2018).
5. Amir Khasru. Why Bangladesh has not found a strong basis for democracy [In Bengali language] // Daily Bangladesh protidin.14 December, 2015. [Electronic resource]. URL: bd-pratidin.com/editorial/2015/12/15/115339/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
6. Masudul Haque A.K.M. Emergency powers and caretaker government in Bangladesh// Journal of the Australasian Law Teachers Association. 1 (1). 81-94. [Electronic resource]. URL: www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/JlALawTA/2008/9.pdf/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
7. Bangladesh - political violence, A case study from the 2014 Human Rights and Democracy Report [Electronic resourses]. // 12 March, 2015. [Electronic resource]. URL: www.gov.uk/.../case-studies/bangladesh-political-viol/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
8. Dr. Abdul Quddus S.M. Election, Political Instability and Fragile Democracy in Bangladesh: Is Proportional Representation the Remedy// Bangladesh Journal of Islamic thought, Dec. 27, 2016. [Electronic resource]. URL:www.bjit.iiitbd.org/2016/12/27/election-pohtical-instabihty-fragile-democracy-bangladesh-proportional-representation-remedy/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
9. Emazuddin Ahmed. The problems of democracy in Bangladesh [In Bengali language]// Weekly Newspaper Samprotik Deshkal. 29 May, 2014. [Electronic resource]. URL: http://shampratikdeshkal.com/festival-issue/2014/07/04/1356/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
10. Farhat Tasnim. Politicized Civil Society in Bangladesh: Case Study Analyses // Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: an Interdisciplinary Journal. ISSN1837-5391. Vol. 9. № 1, 2017. Page 98-123.
11. Kapur A.C., 1993. Principles of Political Science. New Delhi: S. Chand & Company Ltd.
12.Moniruzzaman М. Parliamentary Democracy in Bangladesh: An Evaluation of the Parliament during 1991-2006. // Commonwealth & Comparative Politics. Vol. 47. № 1. 100-126. February, 2009.
13. Haque M. Inamul. Future of the Democracy and politics in Bangladesh[ In Bengali language] // Jatio Sampod Rokkha. Jan. 7, 2016. [Electronic resource]. URL: jasorbd.com/content/25.html/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
14. Nizam Ahmed. Parliament and democratic consolidation in Bangladesh // Australasian Parliamentary Review, Spring, 2011. Vol. 26 (2). 53-68. [Electronic resource]. URL: www.aspg.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Nizam.pdf/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
15. The State of Conflict and Violence in Asia, The Asia Foundation [Electronic resource]. // 11 Oct., 2017. URL :https://asiafoundation.org/.../state-conflict-violence-asia/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
16.Даймонд Л. Прошла ли «третья волна» демократизации? [Electronic resource]. URL: polisportal.ru/files/File/puvlication/Starie_publikacii_Polisa/D/199913Dimond_Proshla_ li_3_volna_demokratizacii.pdf/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
17. Балиев Алексей. У Донбасса судьба Бангладеш? [Electronic resource], 14.05.2014. URL: stoletie.ru/geopolitika/u_donbassa_sudba_bangladesh_931.htm/ (date of access: 07.04.2018).
