Balance of Power (2)

Tragically, this tradition, set in motion in the first tenure of the BNP, was perpetuated by the Awani League, This time the BNP played their role in boycotting parliament. Tho the credit of the Awarni league they did make some efforts to empower parliament by establishing the prime Minister's question Hour and activating the parliamentary committees. But the BNP boycotted prime minister's question hour, while their long boycotts of the Jatiyo Sangshad weakened the effectiveness of the parliamentary committees. Once again the PMO became the centre of power in the then government with little or no accountability to parliament.

The return of the BNP-led alliance to office in 2001, with weak representation of the opposition in parliament, elevated the PMO into a virtual monarchy. Long boycotts of the parliament by the opposition, the refusal of the ruling party to give any opportunity to the opposition to ask question in the prime Minister's question Hour and the virtual dysfunction of the parliamentary committees transformed the parliament into a rubber stamp institution. Thus, for a period of 15 years and three elected government, we have been witness to an all-powerful prime, minister, an unaccountable executive, and a dysfunctional parliament. It is hardly suprising that governance has degenerated and corruption has flourished.

After this long exposure to and ineffective parliament whether under a presidential or parliamentary system, it is somewhat bizarre to be arguing that we now need to solve the problems of a malfunctioning democracy by strengthening the president's powers and putting in place an unelected suprabody in the form of a National Security Council.

The Pakistan experience, which is being enacted before our eyes today, should have educated us to the un workability of a duality of power between a president and parliament. In recognition of the un-workability of this arrangement the Pakistanis are seeking to amend the constitution to clip the powers of the president, which have invariable been used to frustrate the electoral mandate. A similar dyarchy of power in Nepal between the king and parliament has culminated in the abolition of the monarchy.

What we should be looking for today in Bangladesh is to return to the letter and spirit of the 1973 constitution by restoring the power of the parliament. It is the parliament which should be the real source of imposing cheeks and balances on a potentially autocratic prime minister, and to bold the government accountable for all its deeds of omission band commission. The central issue in the ongoing dialogue should, thus, be on how to strengthen the institution of parliament and to make it into an effective instrument of political accountability ofr the prime minister and the government. It is, after all, the parliament which actually elects the prime minister and can vote him or her out of office.