Speech delivered by
H.E Dr. Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury
at the Royal Institute for International Relations
(Egmont Institute, Brussels, Belgium on 4 April 2008)

Democracy in Bangladesh: A Way Forward

The practice of diplomacy, a career I have been pursuing for a long time, has always been fraught with great circumspection. It is one of the hallmarks, indeed mainstays of the profession. Anecdotes on this score abound. For instance, there is one of Talleyrand, the Grand Old Man of the 19th Century French diplomacy. The year was 1830, and the month was February. The second French revolution was breaking out. Talleyrand was retired then, living in his Paris apartment. One evening as the political changes in France were evolving, he was receiving guests. There was noise of fighting in the streets below. Talleyrand walked across the window and looked down to see. "It seems we are winning," he observed. "But who are we, excellence ?" his visitors asked, obviously perplexed. "Hush," he replied "I shall tell you tomorrow".

But today in this hallowed ambience of the Egmont Institute in the heart of the European Union I hope to be able to show as much caution as I can, and talk to you with as much frankness as I can muster. Before addressing the substance of the discussion, let me just say that Bangladeshis place great store by European norms, values and standards. Today as we forge greater intra-regional cooperation in South Asia, the European experience remains at the back of our minds. I am beholden to Ambassador Claude Mission and the Institute for giving me this opportunity to interact with you.

Let me turn without further ado to the topic before us: "Democracy in Bangladesh: A Way forward". Bangladesh as you all know is located at the edge of the vast South Asian subcontinent and borders Myanmar or Burma as well. It is an overwhelmingly Muslim majority country of 145 million people, in terms of population one of the largest Member State of the United Nations. Its over 35 years of existence in the present form of an independent country, was preceded by centuries of history as a cultural identity. In the past the Greater Bengal, including the portion which is a part of the Indian Union, this entity gave birth to progressive ideas and ideals that often led Indian thought-processes. Early last century, the Indian leader and statesman Gokhale famously remarked: "What Bengal thinks today, India thinks tomorrow".

The Bengali literacy renaissance that occurred in the 19th Century moulded the protestant intellectual heritage of our country. The Bengali intelligentsia, not a class in a Marxian sense as they were unrelated to the processes of production, but rather more of a Weberian status Group challenged the existing mores, by refusing to accept without questioning whatever they heard at the feet of the guru. They were Socratic in their mental make-up and would agree with Aristotle's retort at his Mentor; "Amicus Plato" Aristotle had said: "sed magis amica veritas" - dear is Plato, but dearer still is the truth!"

The mighty Rabindranath Tagore, the poet, was heir to that tradition, as were, later, great minds like Amarta Sen and Mohammed Yunus. I describe this at some length because in some ways it helps explain the current events in Bangladesh. The situation in Bangladesh is seen by many analysts as a political intervention by the intelligentsia of this country, the contemporary successor to their old Calcutta counterpart. They have in this case asserted themselves to correct the imbalances of governance that had reached such prodigious proportions as to threaten to rip apart the very fabric of society.

Bangladesh, earlier called East Bengal, and thereafter East Pakistan, became independent following a liberation War in 1971. In its 37 years of history it has been a kaleidoscope of social and political transformation. It has tried several experiments in terms of political systems, ultimately settling for Bengal's old love, the Westminster model. It is noteworthy that in all of South Asia, Bengal enjoys the closest intellectual, political and cultural affinities with Britain, flowing from the fact that it is in this part of the sub-continent the British first arrived, and settled. Behind these periodic shifts in political experimentations was the insatiable resolve of the Bangladeshis for a just and equitable social order. It is said that Bangladeshis never fear to change. It is their will to change, fed by the penchant for perfection, that render them such a vibrant and as some would describe with an element of truth, such a turbulent society.

Over the past three decades the urges of the intelligentsia begun to be reflected in their famous civil society, in their NGOs numbering thousands that earned such global reknown, as also in their armed forces, which as one of the foremost UN peace-keepers won laurels for their country. Institutions like Grameen Bank (which as you know is much more than just a bank!) and BRAC, along with so many others of their ilk, became agents of social transformation and were instrumental in the fight against poverty and gender injustice. Bangladeshi NGOs became the source of inspiration for positive change in different parts of the world often working closely with the UN, though also independently. The armed forces acquired UN values through their long association with UN peace-keeping.

Their efforts made Bangladesh a success-story in poverty alleviation. These also had a unique role in women's empowerment. Women, through the acquisition of micro-credit and non-formal education, became mainstreamed in the nation's socio-political ethos. This helped keep at bay fundamentalism and extremism, including terrorism. These twin dark forces of our times, fundamentalism and terrorism, were marginalized and held in check, not by police-action or diktat of the State from above or outside, but by indigenously spawned social transformation from within and below. Indeed, Bangladesh's so called 'silent revolution', - as the World Bank described it came to be known as a new and attractive paradigm for development.
- Alas, this positive experience was not evident in the evolving politics of the country. The Bangladeshis, unlike many other parts of the South Asian Sub-continent, constituted a largely egalitarian society, feudalism having been eliminated by land reforms and legislations our half a century ago. But unfortunately the political institutions were unable to contain the fierce pluralist spirit of the populace. The politicians concentrated solely on the capture of power. 'The Economist' called Bangladeshi politics the most polarized in the world, despite the fact that the two major political parties differed little from each other in ideological terms. It was the extreme case of the phenomena of political parties growing around individuals rather than ideas.

For about fifteen years they controlled the government in turn, each every five years. Their mutual dislike was so intense that the leaders were not even on speaking terms. When one formed government, the other invariably boycotted the Parliament. It was a winner-take-all situation, and the loser was excluded from everything. Hence grew this tremendous propensity to want to win, for there was so much a victory would deliver. Muscle power and black-money were freely used in elections. Politics became a profession, and the politicians predatory. Not surprisingly, corruption became pervasive. It was eating away at the vitals of the community. Just as the Roman Senator Cicero had said two thousand years ago: "inter arma enim silent legis" -in the face of arms, law fell mute! Despite Bangladesh's very favourable image in so many aspects, for the past five years, annually, it had earned the unenviable cognomen according to the Transparency International as the world's most corrupt government. This year it had slipped to the second place. Unkind critics said it had bribed its way out of the top of the list.

Such was the mistrust between the political parties that in 1996 the Constitution was amended to incorporate the concept of the neutral non-political Caretaker Government, which would assume office three months prior to elections, as no party believed another of its kind would hold elections freely and fairly. Eventually, they acquired the skill of manipulating the Caretaker Government itself, by fielding supporters in key positions before leaving power. While twice before the system worked acceptably but with decreasing effectivity, the third time round, on the latest occasion it clearly failed. The immediate past government was alleged to have so thoroughly manipulated the system, that the other major party, which was incidentally leading in the polls, threatened not only to boycott the elections, but also reject the results. Violence erupted throughout the country. The grounds became rife for breeding extremism. The country was simply becoming an ungovernable space. The rest of the world could not afford this development in a country of this dimension. The diplomats, and even the UN, were alarmed. Bangladesh hit world headlines, but for the wrong reasons, which her people least deserved.

It was under those circumstances, that on 11th January this year, the Emergency clauses of the Constitution were invoked, and a second Caretaker Government was put in place, supported by both the civil society and the armed forces, in other words by the 'bhadralok' of Bangladesh, who were watching from the margins in awesome horror the descent to political nadir.
- This is the Government of which I am a part. It is our primary goal, indeed our Constitutional obligation, to hold free, fair and credible elections. The Chief of Caretaker Government Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed, putting at rest some speculation the contrary, has equivocally declared on 12 April - and repeated thereafter, that we would not remain in office a single day more than is absolutely necessary, and that "the election would be held before the end of December 2008". The response from all concerned political circles, as well as foreign friends, have been positive. Let me reiterate here that there will be no deviation from that goal.

These can be categorized under four broad baskets: These are not ranked in a taxonomic pecking order, that is, one does not enjoy a higher priority over the other, and all are expected to be taking place at the same time.

The first is electoral reforms. The government has created a strong institution, the Election Commission, which is shepherding the process. It is this Commission which has, through its Road Map, determined the milestones on the way to the holding of the actual elections. In the Road Map announced by the Commission, the electoral time frame coincides with the end-date announced by the Chief Advisor, or head of government, which is "no later than December 2008".

The revamped and reconstituted Election Commission has undertaken a gigantic "Voters Registration project" with photo identification, finger prints and other essential information. We thank the European Union for supporting this project with financial assistance. Over 40 million voters' registration (50% of total voters) has been completed by March 01, 2008 and the 100% registration is scheduled to be completed by June this year. Through the framing of electoral rules, it is expected that the EC would be able to stimulate the reformist propensities in these political parties. The Government for its part has ensured the independence of not just the Commission, but also its Secretariat, by separating it from the Prime Minister's Office. The Commission has begun its formal consultations with the political parties.

Local governments were neglected during the period of last three elected governments and as such there had been no properly functioning local government with local representations. The CTG and the Election Commission are taking necessary preparations to hold local elections either before or with the national elections. This will help separate the law making function of the members of Parliament and the running of local administrations by the locally elected representatives.

The Government will also hold consultations and dialogue with the political parties with open minds and open agenda in this month in effort to create a congenial conditions for holding a free, fair and credible elections and also establishing a sustainable and healthy democracy in the long run.

The second category would be public service reforms. Time was when the subcontinent's bureaucracy was a source of pride to our nations. Over decades this apolitical arm of the government became organically linked to its political parts, for the rewards of acquiescence of wrongful compliance were often too great to ignore. The government, therefore, has revamped the Public Service Commission, set up strong body of determined persons, to lead it. They are working to restore the prestige of the service and improve the quality of its delivery. Promotions would no longer be fruits of abject service to the political master, but on the basis of a set of objective criteria.

The third category is less of reform, and more of a drive. I am referring to the government's anti-corruption initiatives. These are being spearheaded by a powerful Anti-Corruption Commission the government has installed. Due to the broad systemic failure in governance, some saw corruption as a "failure" or "grease money", at times even arguing that it increased efficiency. They failed to perceive the negative externalities of corruption, its wider impact on people's motivation and productivity. They did not see how corruption took away opportunities from the more deserving. The drive has had to be a mix of police action combined with attempts to bring about a fundamental shift in mindset. Institutional adjustments in the political system might be required to eliminate or in any case reduce the need to be corrupt. Also, both temptations and the opportunities. For instance, the MPs could be delinked from disbursement of development funds and the responsibility entrusted to the local government. Or, the cost of electoral defeat could be reduced by sharing parliamentary offices with the Opposition (Chairs of Committees may come from their ranks which will obverts the need to win elections by fair means or foul). The Government also took steps to sign the UN Commission Against Corruption, the draft of which was gathering dust in the archives for years.

Last but not least is the category related to good governance. Our governments must ensure that all their actions and those of their agents are in consonance with internationally acceptable norms and standards. Such behaviour should actually be in line with the quintessential Bangladesh values that I had spoken earlier and to restore which, was to my mind, one of the principal objectives of 'one-eleven'. This is why we have decided to establish the national Human Rights Commission. This process, had also been stalled in the past, has been set in rapid motion. Before long we expect this Commission to be fully operational. This is in with philosophy that no agent of the government would be above the law, and there will be absolutely no impunity and "zero tolerance" for anyone breaching of the codes of acceptable conduct. To set such parameters we have looked to the United Nations, the Commonwealth and other norm-setting international bodies in this regard. Strengthening local government including devolution of power because concomitant goals. A committee has been set up headed by a former Senior Civil Servant, - Dr. Shawkat Ali, to submit a report on it. One major achievement has been the separation of judiciary from the Executive which has been given effect from 1st November this year. This has come about after years of assurance by various Governments in the past, and has been universally welcome within and outside the country.

Basically then, what this government is seeking to do is to introduce institutional changes, or create new institutional structures to establish the positive values of our society. In each of the above category, a powerful institution will be the 'primum movens' or 'prime movers' of the process. It must be borne in mind that these institutions thus installed will be in place long after the present government is gone. Hopefully what will sustain them in place will be the force of public opinion for there is no substitute for eternal vigilance to keep democracy in place. The very elements in the nation that support the measures of this government - the civil society including the bureaucracy, the armed forces, the professionals, the intelligentsia, the fiercely free media, must always remain eternally vigilant that there is no descent to the situation of status quo ante.
- The beauty of the current development is that it is taking place within the parameters of the existing Constitution. Also, such globally recognized values as human rights and rules of law, imbibed by the civil society and the armed forces through years of close association with the UN, are being rigorously conformed to. For instance there is 'zero-tolerance' of any perceived police excesses, just as we have learnt from UN operations. This is of great satisfaction to someone like me, bred in this UN culture. We see UN standards as critical, and seek to resolutely observe them. This government in turn seeks to be the norm-setter for governments to follow in the future.

We are fully aware democracy is strong when governments learn that it is better to live with an idea that is in convenient, than to try and suppress it. Indeed, my thesis is that the European Union, the UN, the Commonwealth and other recognized standard setting bodies, whose resolutions are often routinely, and unfairly criticized as being redundant exercises, help by creating universally acceptable ideals for member states to abide by. In consonance to these, if we succeed in creating institutions that enable our democracy to sustain, then we can be a model of 'peace building' for many others to emulate.

Bangladesh today, thus, we are set for, what the Chinese would call 'interesting times', critical for my country. Through all this it is important to understand that Bangladesh functions as a remarkably positive and responsible international actor. It is also today an oasis of calm in an extraordinarily turbulent region. It is our hope that, through these institutional reforms, this will remain so.

Are the objectives we have set for ourselves a trifle ambitious ? Yes, they are a trifle ambitious. Are these too tall an order? No, these are not too tall an order. There is resonance in Bangladesh to that clarion call to action from the pen of that mighty poet of the Renaissance, Dante Alighieri: "man's reach should exceed his grasp, for what else are the heavens for"?