OVERVIEW  

The policies and structure of government in Bangladesh resemble that of a free country, however fail to live up to that image in execution. Throughout the semester, the leaders in Bangladeshi government have consistently contradicted policy and the mainstream concepts of a “free country”. Unfair elections and corrupt leadership serve as the core, most prevalent threats to democracy in Bangladesh.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

PROBLEMS & SOLUTIONS

1. FAIRER ELECTIONS
Elections are the core of a democracy. The form of expression in voting gives constituents their voice in government. Therefore, Bangladesh needs to establish fair elections in order to become a more “free”, democratic country. Fair elections would allow the political leaders of Bangladesh to more accurately represent the people by promoting/protecting political pluralism and participation.

First Pass the Post
I think that Bangladesh’s democracy would greatly benefit if they ended or drastically improved their First Past the Post (FPTP) System. A FPTP system can be successful, but has so far been exploited by Bangladeshi politicians. Besides the 2008 elections, none of the governments received more than fifty percent of the popular vote. The result of the ninth parliament’s elections reflect such seat-vote disparity of the elections; The Awami League won 57% of the popular vote, but they received 87% of the seats.  These electoral outcomes give the majority party a false mandate and sense of political superiority. And unlike a successful FPTP system, these falsely supported “majority” parties are less inclined to accommodate for opposition parties and/or converge to the median. In this way, the unreliable process for election results produces an unhealthy power dynamic between the majority party and opposition. From there, the majority party practically has all power, and can manipulate future elections to solidify their reign for long periods of time. In deferring from or improving Bangladesh’s FPTP system, as well as conducting neutral elections, the seats of parliament would more accurately represent the population while also promoting political pluralism (Jahan 2014, p. 254-255).

As I discussed in my previous blog post “Your Vote Doesn’t Count”, this overwhelming power of the majority party has resulted in complete hopelessness for the opposition party. The 2014 elections were boycotted by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) because they knew they were not going to win a significant amount of seats, and those that did participate were subject to violence. However, the upcoming December elections pose other possible new solutions. The BNP will join forces with the Jatika Oikya Front (JOF). The JOF campaigns without the “baggage of corruption” and has a history of supporting the liberation struggle. The plans of the opposition party present a solution to ending the majority’s party control over the elections by joining forces with other underrepresented parties (NewsIn.Asia 2018). Although I see this solution as less successful than changing the electoral process completely, it makes the most sense. The majority party has the most control over elections and therefore would not want to implement fairer elections, so for the opposition, their best bet is to join forces with other parties and transform elections from the outside in. 

 

Representation/ Diversity
The Parliament in Bangladesh also fails to proportionately represent the constituency, especially in terms of gender, economic status, and religion. Don’t be fooled by the fact that the last two prime ministers were women, though that is impressive, the number of women directly elected to parliament remains very low. The ninth parliament, which actually shows progress, still only had 6% of seats has directly elected female members of Parliament. Even with the increase in reserved seats for women (currently 50), the quality of women’s participation has not improved by much. Most of those women are chosen based on traditional values and party loyalty, and are not taken seriously a recipients of affirmative action. A possible way to improve the quality and quantity of women’s political participation, as argued by many women’s organizations, is by demanding women’s quota in different tiers of the political party organization, direct elections for the women’s reserved seats, and enhanced quota for party nomination for elections. It comes down to fostering and legitimizing the role of women in politics (Jahan 2014, p. 255-257).

Money & Religion
As always, money is power. However, in an ideally free country, money should matter less than ideas when running for office. However, the high costs associated with running an election campaign prevent less affluent candidates from winning, and many from running in the first place. This prevents poorer, but just as intelligent/capable/popular candidates from winning while also preventing the lower class in being represented. The wealthy are buying party nominations and investing to ensure their election. Leftist parties that do advocate for the poor are politically insignificant (Jahan 2014, p. 258-260). Such impediments on resource-poor representation can be countered by limiting the spending on campaigns or limiting spending to a specific amount given to each candidate by the government. Other solutions that do not involve government action include the mobilization of the poor in collective action to support their candidates.
The majority of the population of Bangladesh is Muslim, however this does not justify the lack of representation for religious minorities. About ten percent of the population is Hindu. There is no support for affirmative action for the representation of Hindus. To ensure that their representation corresponds with their population, the Hindus also need to gather community support/power through collective action.
The hypothesized solutions for both underrepresented groups, the poor and religious minorities, are to mobilize themselves in collective action. This is largely because there is no internal power that is inclined to make any change for the increased representation of these groups. 

In order to become a more “free” country, elections in Bangladesh need to be more fair, thus resulting in a more accurately representative body.

2. CORRUPTION
Corruption is the major problem in Bangladeshi government. I consistently return to the point that I think policies in Bangladesh themselves are those of a “free” country, but the political corruption prevents those laws from proper execution.

Corruption has invaded Bangladeshi government in all aspects. The constitution of Bangladesh is relatively young (45 years), and for its short life, has always been (at least partly) manipulated by leaders. This precedent has allowed for the continuation of law as a secondary power. The extent to which the law in Bangladesh is enforced is largely dependent on officials, therefore fostering a structure where the leaders matter more than law and laws not being seriously enforced. People often turn to the judiciary as their last resort to get justice- the rule of law (Khan and Islam 2014, p. 31). In my last blog post “Laws Are Just Words”, I discuss law enforcement’s own judgement reigning over the actual law.  The prioritization of law would prevent the scenario in which a corrupt leader, although a corrupt or radical leader is a problem in itself, from transforming a democracy into an authoritarian regime. One of the first steps to Bangladesh becoming a free country is preventing corruption through a stronger dedication to their democratic constitution than individual leaders or parties. This is not as concrete of a solution as changing the structure elections, but the problem isn’t with the laws themselves. Judiciary as the last resort is a reflection of how people seek justice by proving that laws were violated. It is by normalizing lawful behavior among the bureaucracy, including political leaders and law enforcement, through elections and court rulings, that corruption can be reduced. Precedent is a powerful tool that has shaped stable democracies.

Additionally, transparency in government operations would increase accountability and therefore reduce corruption. The next steps for Bangladesh to reduce corruption and combat the developed system of elitism to become more of a “free” country are to increase  depoliticize institutions such as law enforcement and the judiciary. There should be a proper system implemented to foster administrative transparency and accountability. Public release of reports of Parliamentary committees would increase bureaucratic accountability (Khan and Islam 2014, p. 35).

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

ELECTIONS, CORRUPTION, AND BEYOND

Although I divide the main threats to democracy in Bangladesh into two, separate sections, these two issues are part of each other, and work together as part of a larger framework with other (just as important) aspects of governance. Fairer elections lead to less corruption in the same way that lowering corruption should foster more fair elections in the future. Increasing transparency would not only prevent corruption, but in itself attract less corrupt leaders. Improving one aspect of governance is only successful with other moving parts.

Bangladesh’s road to democratic consolidation is a long, multifaceted process that will require work by outside groups/organizations combined with structural changes in the government. I believe that unfair elections and corrupt leadership are the main factors driving Bangladesh away from becoming a free, democratic nation.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Works Cited

Khan, Mohammad Mohabbat, and Md. Shahriar Islam. “Democracy and Good Governance in Bangladesh: Are They Compatible?” Millennial Asia 5, no. 1 (2014): 23-40. doi:10.1177/0976399613518855.

Jahan, Rounaq. “The Parliament of Bangladesh: Representation and Accountability.” The Journal of Legislative Studies, October 29, 2014, 250-69. Accessed November 18, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2014.975470.

Editor. “Elections for Bangladesh’s 11 Th. Parliament Will Be Different.” NewsIn.Asia. November 20, 2018. Accessed November 20, 2018. https://newsin.asia/elections-for-bangladeshs-11-th-parliament-will-be-different/.

 

 

Rule of Law

Rule of Law describes how and how effectively law is executed in the country, largely resulting from those whose roles require the interpretation of the law (ex. Judges, law enforcement). The Rule of Law in a free country means there must be an independent judiciary, due process in civil and criminal matters, protection against illegitimate use of force, and equal treatment under the law. The judiciary should act independently in that there should be no/limited influences from the other branches of government, rulings should be impartial, the process for judges to be picked and dismissed should be fair, and finally the legitimate enforcement and compliance to such rulings. The prevailing of due process in civil and criminal matters implies the presence of defendants’ rights, access to courts and legal counsel, right to fair trial, prosecutors independent from government or private influence, and professional/justified law enforcement. The protection against unjustified use of physical force and freedom from war/revolts is present when there is a lack of violence during arrests or questioning (and if there is abuse experiences, there are effective means of petition and redress), decent treatment in detention facilities and prisons, and the population is not subject to acts of violence in conflict and civil war. Equal treatment under laws, policies, and practices is ensured when various groups including minorities (LGBT, religious, and ethnic groups, etc.) are able to exercise their full rights, that violence against such groups is considered a crime, that there is a lack of discrimination against these groups for employment/education/housing, non-citizens have human rights. The moving parts which define a country’s Rule of Law are based on how fairly the law is executed, interpreted, and how well it ensures people’s rights are secured (Freedom House, 2018).

Rule of Law in A Free Country

A just rule of law is essential to the functioning of a free country. Rule of law should largely serve to prevent the exploitation and elitist exceptions in the legal system. Corruption in the rule of law would result in the imprisonment and abuse of anyone who objects those in power, while the law would go soft for any elite or person in power. The goals of a free country are focused to do the precise opposite- the rule of law should ensure equal treatment and minimized influence from outside parties.

Rule of Law in Bangladesh

The Dhaka Tribune’s article about “Police Violence on Students” covers the student protests following the killing of a group of students by a speeding bus. Such protests have resulted in student-police clashes, including accounts of the police firing batons and charging to suppress protesters. The article also questions the legitimacy/constitutionality that the police had in reacting so violently to the protests, led primarily by students under the age of 18. For example, article 37 of the Constitution of Bangladesh specifically ensures the right for minors to protest peacefully. Section 70 of the Child Rights Act 2013 also states that the act of physical and mental torture of children is punishable (Hasan, 2018).

Based on this article, and the information gathered throughout my other blog posts, the police is another part of the corrupt Bangladeshi government. The police are easily influenced by the leading party, and this case reflects their prioritization of order over the law. The Bangladeshi police contributes to why Bangladesh is not a fully “free” country since there is not much protection over the illegitimate use of force. Even though there are laws to prevent the illegitimate use of force, it is clearly not implemented.

UPI article “Bangladesh court sentences 19 to die for grenade attack 14 years ago”, as indicated by its title, covers the court sentence of 19 executions (all are BNP members) for a grenade attack that occurred over a decade ago. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party’s secretary general describes the verdict as “just another example of using judiciary political revenge.” The BNP party chief and son of the former prime minister were sentenced to life imprisonment (Adamczyk, 2018).

I think that this attack that killed 24 people is a crime that cannot go without repercussions. However, the real question this article raises is whether this sentence and other sentences plaguing the nation has political motive. There seems to be an obvious trend of the Awami League exercising their power as a way to ensure that they never lose that power. They are using military force and the courts to punish opposition. In doing so, they send a message to the general public while suppressing the opposition. Such a harsh sentence will intimidate anyone supporting the BNP. Additionally, if these are falsely accused criminals, then it would both fulfill the Awami League’s agenda by antagonizing the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and oppressing its members. Without getting into the issues of a death sentence in itself, I think that this case is also a reflection of how the rule of law in Bangladesh limits its chances to be considered a “free” country since the judiciary and every other part of government can be so easily influenced by power rather than law and justice.

Works Cited

“Methodology: Freedom in the World 2018.” Freedom House. April 19, 2018. Accessed November 09, 2018. https://freedomhouse.org/report/methodology-freedom-world-2018.

Adamczyk, Ed. “Bangladesh Court Sentences 19 to Die for Grenade Attack 14 Years Ago.” UPI. October 10, 2018. Accessed November 09, 2018. https://www.upi.com/Bangladesh-court-sentences-19-to-die-for-grenade-attack-14-years-ago/3081539186238/.

Hasan, Muhibul. “Police Violence on Students.” Dhaka Tribune. August 09, 2018. Accessed November 09, 2018. https://www.dhakatribune.com/magazine/weekend-tribune/2018/08/09/police-violence-on-students.

 

 

 

 

Political Pluralism and Participation

According to Freedom House, political pluralism and (expansive) participation is available when people can freely and safely express/support their political preferences, political parties have fair chance to garner support, non-democratically accountable groups are not influencing individual political choices, and relevant groups have suffrage rights and opportunities. The ability to freely organize and support political groupings means that there should be no undue obstacles (i.e excessive requirements and regulations) to operate, discrimination that hinders the ability to gather, and subjection to harassment for (peaceful) party members. The opportunity to gain support and power is measured by considering the aspects of government and society that enable opposing views- there should be a presence of genuine opposition in positions of power in government, a lack of restrictions that prevents groups form gaining support, lack of harassment/violence that influences political support, and opposition parties’ can participation in elections. Non-democratically accountable groups such as the military or foreign powers should not have the power to influence political choices (of voters and candidates) such as through bribes, harassment, or asserting control over employees. The government should not inhibit political participation through conservative policy, excessive policies regarding citizenship to prevent the exercise of suffrage rights, and the interests of women and minorities should be represented in parties (Freedom House, 2018).

Political Pluralism and Participation in A Free Country

Political Pluralism and Participation serves as a safeguard for the people’s political interests. This security in a multiplicity of viewpoints and political ideologies prevents one party from gaining too much power. Inevitably, no country can be “free” without political pluralism and participation because these factors are essential in providing an accurate representation of beliefs in the constituency. Obviously a country cannot be ruled by the people if the people cannot freely and fairly exercise suffrage rights, thus making expansive political participation key in the establishment of a “free” country. And although in an ideal society everyone would all align with the same political party, expansive participation must also coincide with political pluralism to ensure that the country is not only limited to one political belief system/ party platform. It is through this effort to represent and support a nation’s ideological diversity that makes a country a “free” country.

Political Pluralism and Participation in Bangladesh

In BBC article “Bangladesh Ex-PM Khaleda Zia Jailed amid Clashes”, the jailing of former prime minister and opposition leader (Bangladesh Nationalist Party- BNP), Khaleda Zia, sparked protest. Zia claims that the charges against her, primarily on the basis of corruption and missing money/embezzlement, are politically motivated. Her, her son, and ten of her aides were also sentenced with jail time. Tear gas was used against protesters by police, and the BNP claims hundreds of supporters were arrested prior to the verdict (BBC, 2018).

Although I question whether or not the charges against Zia were completely “politically claimed” considering a trend of corruption in Bangladeshi government, I still believe that her power and the power of the BNP is deliberately attacked and suppressed by the current leaders of the Awami League. This power struggle and idea that one party must reign indicates a lack of political pluralism. The ability and history for the leading party in Bangladesh to silence other political parties also indicates a lack of true political participation. The Awami League uses their power to ensure that they do not lose that power.

A few months prior to Zia’s verdict, Pulack’s “Bangladesh: Thousands of Opposition Members Arrested, Activists Say” describes the arrest of thousands of BNP members and leaders to prevent their participation in upcoming elections. BNP lawyer Sanaullah Miah claims that over four thousand cases were filed against BNP leaders by the police. Such attempts to prevent the BNP’s participation in the elections this year would be a repetition of the 2014 elections, when the BNP was also not represented in the polls (Ghatack, 2018).

Both these articles bring up the issue of the oppression of political pluralism in Bangladeshi government. There is a very clear trend of the Awami League’s abuse of power to prevent political participation. Their abuse in itself is intimidating enough in itself to prevent people from supporting any other political party.

Considering the extreme violence and tension between parties, combined with deliberate oppression by the ruling political party, I will say that the political pluralism in Bangladesh is more expansive than I expected. Don’t get me wrong, there are serious issues in regards to representation, corruption, tolerance, purposeful sabotage, etc., but I think all that is a testament to the strength and resilience of opposition parties. For almost a decade, the Awami League has used intimidation and exploited their power to oppress opposition, and yet there is still a strong opposition. There is significant amount of support for opposition powers and a determination for political pluralism that continues to drive these party conflicts. So although political pluralism and participation in Bangladesh is stifled because of corrupt governance, there is much to be said about the determination of the opposition party that still enables a presence of political pluralism in Bangladesh.

Works Cited

“Methodology: Freedom in the World 2018.” Methodology: Freedom in the World 2018 | Freedom House. April 19, 2018. Accessed November 02, 2018. https://freedomhouse.org/report/methodology-freedom-world-2018.

Ghatack, Pulack. “Bangladesh: Thousands of Opposition Members Arrested, Activists Say.” BenarNews. October 9, 2018. Accessed November 02, 2018. https://www.benarnews.org/english/news/bengali/opposition-arrests-10092018173451.html.

“Bangladesh Ex-PM Khaleda Zia Jailed amid Clashes.” BBC News. February 08, 2018. Accessed November 02, 2018. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42987765.