POLITICS FOR PEOPLE cover but a segment of the total field of human rights and the legal
sanctions can be applied only after the violations have taken place an
Throughout recorded history, philosophers and thinkers have
sought to solve the problems of how to establish a balance between
the rights and obligations of human beings. In the earlier period,
loyalty to a community was rewarded by unhindered exercise of
rights. Later the feudal lords guaranteed security and safety of every
basic human need. The Greeks realized that a contented man was
necessary for a happy society yet they could not devise the principles
of human rights due to dominant master-slave culture. The advent of
Humanism in 7th century Asia paved the way for the age of Man in
which human needs and urges for freedom and enlightenment have
been accorded recognition. Since then as the limits of human
knowledge have widened, more and more attention has been paid to
the requirements identifying and safeguarding such rights as are
considered essential for the progress of humankind. In the eighteenth
century, the ideas of constitutional enlightenment which provide the
frame-work of human rights as a part of political culture and social
morality was spelt out. The adoption of Universal Declaration of
Human Rights by the General Assembly of the UNO in 1948 chalked
out a broad consensus of contemporary civilization on the subject of
human rights.
However, it did not ensure that everyone in this earth is
guaranteed full freedom or that all governments are committed to
safeguarding human rights without any exception. Till today, human
beings continue to be a victim of discrimination, intolerance and in
equality at the hands of fellow men. Despite the existence of UN
Human Rights Commission and similar bodies at regional and
national levels there is no full proof system under which an individual
or a community or even a nation can seek immediate or effective
redress of grievances of human rights.
There are two main reasons for this dreadful situation. First,
the legislative guarantee designed by western type of democracy
can only be substantiated by relevant evidences which is hardly
possible, for there stands the browbeat of the powerful violations.
Secondly, the safeguarding of human rights is frequently considered
on political or ideological basis. The western society’s thinking is
concentrated on political rights but ignores economic and social
rights. Freedom of exercising human rights is judged on ground of
religion, race, creed and colour. Thus, serious contradictions exist
between the receipts and practices of contemporary world in respect
of safeguarding human rights. The diabolical position adopted by the
economically rich and military powerful countries that support
undemocratic govt. is the only reason behind the violation of human
rights in all parts of the world.
Like most subjects affecting human personality, human rights
has many facets. As an all-pervading and complete code human rights
provide a comprehensive framework of human conduct in terms of
individual, social, moral, political, economic, civil rights and
obligations. It stands firm and uncompromising on freedom of
conscience, i.e. exercise of reason- and to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
This is essential so that knowledge may be fostered and ignorance
repelled. The principles concerning the protection of personal
property, and possessions, equality before law, equality of opportunity
supported by unhindered access of means, abolishing poverty,
equitable distribution and redistribution of wealth, elimination of
social dominance and economic exploitation, ensuring political rights,
guaranteed sanctity of contracts and agreements as expressed in all
political, economic and social mandates between the government and
the people are the true basis of the concepts of human rights. Human
rights are not only a set of code of conduct but must be regarded as a
code of civilization, which fulfils spiritual and material needs of all
human beings.
 Life is dynamic, and so are human beings and human society.
One characteristics of dynamism is that it generates friction,
differences and even disputes. The exercise of right to differ is the
root of all inquiry, investigation, research and knowledge that led
human society to progress. We must strive to safeguard the rights but
we must secure that our differences should act and react beneficently
and not destructively, i.e., we have to submit to the rule of law.
Human beings on the move along the long difficult and weary path
trodden, up the corridors of history, through centuries of sufferings
and tribulations aspired for nothing else but freedom, justice and
equality. It is necessary and essential that the western rich and mighty
nations come back to norm, i.e. be guided by the core sense of human
rights and discharge their duties totally and impartially to safeguard
freedom, justice and equality, and contribute to the promotion of
human welfare and prosperity in social, economic, political walks of
life of all people of all nations. After two world wars, in which million
of human beings were indiscriminately killed in the concentration
camps and aerial bombings the mankind did not learned much. A
satanic urge to dominate over the weaker segment of human beings of
the weaker nations and to create intermediator national governments
and embolden them by every means i.e. arms and financial grants and
supporting them to wage political and economic exploitation on
helpless men women and children and when those ill fated human
beings cry in pain and stand to resist, terming them as terrorists is in
no way be called safeguarding human rights.
Democracy, though a form of government, is in reality, a way
of life and a goal or ideal. The democratic way of life recognizes the
equality and dignity of all people regardless of social standing. A goal
of democratic society is to assure its people opportunity and means to
make full use of their abilities. Democracy, in practice now a days
often falls short of democracy as an ideal. In a democratic society, it is
important that politicians know how the people feel about public
issues. In democracy majority rule is based on the idea that the
judgment (and not whine or motives) of the “many” is better than the
judgment of the “few”, but that does not confer on the majority to do
whatever it wants. Certain rights are there that can never be taken
away from the minorities. The measure of democracy is the measure
of the freedom granted to its humblest citizens.
Democracies attempt to preserve individual freedom and to
promote equality in their per suit of happiness. The greatest obstacle
to individual freedom and equality is political. Nation must have
programs to provide economic security, to ease sufferings and to
develop human potential. People differ in ability but democracy must
meet the just demands at the people more effectively. Citizen should
be able to talk and help shape public opinion by speaking out on
important issues. In democracy, the movement of persons of groups
forms social groups. People are extremely inquisitive and have long
sought to understand themselves and their place in this earth. It
assumes that each individual has certain needs and that an individual
joins a group to achieve something from it and the group in turn
expects each member to make some type of contribution that will
enrich it. Democracy discovers the best means of achieving designed
goals with a minimum of needless conflict, as human dignity and
respect for individual are considered basic. To avoid conflict,
democracy finds ways to maintain human relations by mutual
accommodation. With accepted norms, people become certain about
what is expected of them. Human conflicts are not always
troublesome. Sometimes it clarifies objectives and thus redress the
simmering tensions. Human nature must be looked at candidly and
honestly. It needs refinement. Democracy develops human beings
whose powers are all in balance, who have knowledge and wisdom,
who knows how to live in harmony with others, who honors laws of
nature and possess high standard of moral judgment and try to
interpret the meaning of life in the society. It awares the best use of
knowledge and power in a human way. An individual perceives this
world according to his own experience. This affects his personality
and leads him to direct his behavior to satisfy the needs of his total
self. In the development of human personality one strives for self-
actualization, self-maintenance and self-enhancement. Negation of
human rights leads to loneliness of self-alienation and self-rejection.
 The central theme today running across the country is
Governance. This of course require a minimum common
understanding about this key term which in Bangladesh concept is yet
to be defined precisely. The term has thus far, been used rather
flexibly and serves as an umbrella concept which enables it to
incorporate a variety of social, political and cultural variables within
its discourse. This eclectic use of the concept of governance is thus a
source of confusion. It is therefore important to conceptualize
operationalise and apply the general idea of governance more
precisely, so as to ascertain its real explanatory value.
Governance is a complex of processes; more precisely it is a
process of formation and realization of a superstructure of a political
authority of a country given the constraints of a vision, commitment,
strategy and capacity. In reality all these four continuously changing
over time and therefore the term governance is a dynamic one.
It is true that a mental picture of an ideal future may arise at any time
in the mind of an individual running the country, but this individual
vision needs to be socially articulated through accumulating a
minimum level of support within society in order to qualify as a
natural democratic ideal rather than an individual’s dream. Thus a
serious vision is formed through formal and informal processes of
discussions, negotiations with various classes and social groups,
political leaders, industrial and agricultural sector people and civil
societies. The important point is not the size of the social forces
mobilized behind democratic ideal but the quality of their support.
Two features are important in determining the quality of the support
or the primary degree of commitment to governance. Ownership of
the vision is important, eg. if the vision in conceived or imposed by
external forces, say aid donors; thus the degree of commitment as the
quality of support required at home is likely to be weak. A vague,
abstract and popular vision is more likely to reflect a zero or very little
commitment behind it even if it is owned domestically. On the other
hand a domestically owned vision generally reflects a higher degree of
commitment through a more realistic concretization of the vision. A
well articulated vision linking a few long term goals consistently
within a holistic strategic framework given substance by micro level
programs and projects actually reveals a higher level of commitment
on the part of the political authority. After achieving higher degree of
commitment in terms of the ability of the political authority to take
hard policy decisions which may become necessary for implementing
the concretized vision; the relevant areas of focus for those hard
changes in politics are mobilization of resources, mobilization of
support from private sector, civil society, state machinery and finally
the creation and enforcement of new institutions in all those spheres to
implement the vision. This change in policies is not a mechanical and
rigid process and its final or part success also depends on the maturity,
learning effect and practical statecraft of the government.
To determine the factors on which depend the capacity of the
government to implement its vision the sources of the strength of the
government as it exists prior to any changes in policies and action for
implementation of the vision should be assessed. The strength of the
capacity of the state obviously depends on the form of the
government, but at the same time it is also partly derived from the
nature of the vision and policies. A vision that promotes shared
growth the development is likely to have larger support in the society.
The technical quality of the state machinery, the inherited cultural
values and formal institutions, the presence of supportive private
sector also determines the capacity to implement the democratic ideals
and its inherent values.
It is necessary to trace the interrelations among vision,
commitment, strategy and capacity. The political authority first of all
defines a vision as long term goal for development. However the
political authority is constrained by its commitment and available
capacity that set limits upon the process of implementation of the
formed strategy. If the political authority gives to dynamism, it can try
and build new capacities and learn from experience. The difficult
process of implemention generates a rich feedback from experience,
which may in turn induce the authority to give up or modify or extend
the scope of governance. The initial degree of commitment which is
born simultaneously with the birth of the vision along with the
availability of capacity jointly determines the response pattern of the
political authority to the feedback experience from the primary
process of implementation. The process of implementation lends to
partial, full or zero realization of the vision. Failures or success of
governance is by nature qualitative and partial to the conerete
combination of capacities and commitment with respect to a
concretized vision.
Over the last three decades Bangladesh has witnessed a
progressive loss of ownership over its democratic vision. This process
has been driven by an increasing dependence of foreign prescription
that made unscrupulous attempt to encroach over policy situation in
Bangladesh. In the absence of any domestically designed vision and
heavy aid dependence has logically led the political authority not only
to lose control over its policy agendas but also over its functionaries
where project fetishism has contributed a loss of domestic ownership
and indigenous democratic ideals.
The term governance has come to mean a number of things
including “ a judgement on the quality of government; how people are
ruled, how the affairs of the state are administered and regulated---- a
nation’s system of polities in relation to public administration and
law, exercise of political power to manage a nation’s affairs and the
manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country’s
economic and social resources for development”.
This definition points to (i) there is acceptance of the fact that
governance includes exercise of authority of power (ii) the process
through which authority or power is exercised and with what intent
and (iii) interrelation and interaction among polities, economies,
administration and law in a given society which is of almost
importance for understanding governance. Thus governance denotes
desirable state of affairs, which includes/:
(i) political freedom including free speech and freely
elected parliament,
(ii) constitution and judicial protection for right of the
individual,
(iii) maintenance of rule of law by independent judiciary,
(iv) executive accountability to a freely elected legislature
and
(v) development of society as a whole,
As such governance depends on the extent to which “ a
government is perceived and accepted as legitimate, committed to
improving public welfare and responsive to needs of its citizens,
competent to assure law and order and deliver public services, have
the capacity to create an enabling policy environment for productive
activities and equitable in its conduct”.
The citizens of Bangladesh, at this juncture of the country’s
history deserves governance for more than one reason. During the last
regime the economy was seriously ruined; productivity, efficiency and
moral of public servants deteriorated sharply; indiscipline and miss
management in the public sector was wide spread and there was
serious misuse of public office and state power. The people were not
only interested in dislodging the regime, but also in demolishing what
it stored for and the system it developed to “privatize” state resources
and permanent services. The people naturally aspired for a functional
democratic system that would allow meaningful popular participation
at all levels, protect their fundamental right and rid the nation form
mismanagement and indiscipline.
Political accountability is an essential precondition for the
functioning of a democratic system. It entails that those holding
elective political office must be held accountable to the citizens for all
their actions. It is also necessary that there should be appropriate
checks and balances within the political system so that no one branch
of the government dominates and controls others. Here is dominant
executive, weak legislature, distorted growth and low level of
development of political parties, lack of independence of judiciary,
free but irresponsible media, lack of human right etc. In a
parliamentary system political accountability is ensured by making the
executive accountable to legislature. The legislature keeps watch over
the activities of the executive of through a number of mechanisms
such as various committees where question raised by the legislature
and debates on important issues are held. However, a number of
factors considerably weakened parliament’s performances. These are
(i) the inexperience of the majority of the legislators (ii) the reluctance
of the government to subject itself or its plans to debate (iii) the
tendency of the opposition to oppose only for the sake of opposition
(iv) the floor crossing law that has subjected the legislators to be the
rubber stamp of the parties, wishes and (v) recommendation of the
committees are not acted upon on many occasions due to political
influence and bureaucratic intransigence. In a parliamentary system
the majority party governs with the consent of other parties. So, the
role of the ruling party is to present and defend its policies in the
parliament. The major problem of political accountability in
Bangladesh can be attributed to the nature and character of the
political parties. They have a crucial role in the political development
of the country. However due to different reasons on many occasion
parliaments have not been able to lead and guide effectively at
different crucial juncture. There are the weak natures of the
leadership, fragmentation of parties into different factions/ groups, the
promotion and perpetuation of personality cult, the failure to develop
clear and cohesive socio-economic programs, unstable membership
and lack of organizational discipline and also undemocratic practices.
Fragmentation of political parties into smaller factions groups has
been a recurring phenomenon with party leaders using such split to
obtain benefits for themselves and their key followers from the regime
in power. Political parties have been dominated exclusively by
personalities. The situation resulted in political parties building and
cashing in on the image of a big leader rather then concentrating on
formulating and implementing socio-economic programs. Thus goes
the selection of leader on the basis of heredity and perpetuation of
undemocratic practices within political parties more than ever before.
Bureaucratic accountability is possible only when political
accountability is in place. It requires effective performance of public
agents and officials in their relation with the public in a transparent
manner. There is also a need to monitor the performance of civil
servants and to institutionalize measures to correct their abusers,
excesses and deficiencies. To ensure bureaucratic accountability, civil
servants must be made aware of their responsibilities. All past
governments failed to take decisive steps to define the role-
relationship between political master and public servants and also the
judiciary, the press and the civil society. The rules of business that
empowers the ministers as head of the ministry and the warrant of
precedence that places M Ps on higher rank over civil and military top
brasses is immediately needed. The judiciary should be freed and the
media should be set free but must be held responsible if they tend to
destroy national identity, its culture, moral, ethics etc.
Citizens group or civil society have not been able to play any
significant role in influencing public policies and sleeping behavior
and action of MPs and civil servants . Even the advocacy role of civil
societies has mostly been limited to holding meetings and organizing
seminars with no follow up actions to determine the impact on MPs or
civil servants of recommendations emanating from such gathering.
The colonial power implanted some of their political, social,
legal and economic institutions into their colonies. Their aim was not
to create foundation of a good state but to maintain law and order to
suppress native revolt against the foreign rule and domination so that
they might plunder the colonies. Thus all political activities were seen
with suspicions, political institutions remained particularly
underdeveloped. And even though most people were desperately poor
there were no systematic efforts for building economic institutions.
Lord Cromer once most openly said that England was only ready to
grant independence to its colonies in which it developed a group of
leaders who were imbued with the spirit of western education and
culture and were ready to lead their nation under western influence.
But under no circumstances would the British government allow an
independent Islamic state as it would bring in a human society with
care for natural law where individualism, social justice and free of all
sorts of corruption will be honoured and thus establish an exploitation
free human society and stand against all forms of hegimonism.
Bangladesh, after its independence, the person who claimed to be a
great nationalist leader created a patrimonial state and promoted
‘booty capitalism’ in the name of socialism but stifled economic
development. He opened up a pandora box which contained social,
cultural, religious and political issues that were otherwise untouched
in economic analysis. Changes were afoot in the direction of
economic stagnation and even decline. He failed to maintain law and
order, distorted native culture, encouraged plundering of national
wealth promoted exploitation by his poortymen, neglected public
services, excessive laissez-faire, excessive control and excessive
spending dominated. Economic performance is intimately linked with
economic, social and political institutions –the base of governance.
The government through its coercive power and authority, can create
and develop institution which in term may lead to governance.
Development minded decision makers, if be resolute can have
a large degree of insulation against the ravages of short run pork-
barrel politics and use the discipline of the market against the
inevitable lobbies of groups predation in distributive politics. Such
insulation may be difficult but not impossible in a governance and for
a people oriented political party. When the concept of development
includes autonomy and participation of the people, the insulation of
policy elites becomes particularly suspect. Governance may have
intrinsic value for the welfare of the masses but it is not a panacea for
economic problems unless there is strategy and commitment
supported by capacity.
Governance demands a combination of wisdom in the rulers
and the consent of the ruled. The democratic form of government may
do away with the worst excesses of government if they adequately
restrain the power of the executive. Though the quality of the
government depends rather upon the quality of the governed yet
governance is about legitimacy, rule of law, accountability,
transparency and above all competence of political leadership in
leading the nation to prosperity. “Little else is required to carry a state
to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarianism, but
peace, easy taxes and a tolerable administration of justice; all the rest
being brought about by natural course of things.” Adam Smith,
Arther Lewis emphasized the importance of vertical mobility-
economic and cultural, “we can not expect vigorous economic growth
to occur in communities where social mobility is prevented.” While
institutions are important for maintaining economic politics and social
stability, economic growth if not properly managed can cause social
and political instability.
The state of underdevelopment of Bangladesh today must be
understood not only from the view of the economy, but also from the
social, political, cultural and historical point if view. It is
underdevelopment in its true sense which the nations suffers from
today; a people ruled by outsider for hundred of years have been
ruined morally and culturally and ethically, their pride and self
confidence destroyed along with essential qualities that constitute a
nation.
Since its independence, Bangladesh have failed to develop a
stable political system. It has all kind of government, a large number
of political parties and an unaccountable number of political leaders
and activists, whose political ideologies fall nowhere. The genesis of
the present unstable politics in Bangladesh can be traced to the
autonomy movement and later the liberation war. In the process
Awami League marginalized other political parties and many of them
were wiped out within a short period after independence, the leader
transformed into an all-compassing entity. Just like him, her daughter
tried to institutionalize her personal charisma, but her temperament,
training and background made her suspicious, conspiratorial and
fearful of relinquishing powers.
 In such a state patronize political system. The main causality is
the people, who become superfluous in the ‘system’ if not out right
redundant. Their role in governance of the state is limited only to
participation in state managed election. The ruler of the ruling party
never thinks of the people as an integral part, and the source of
political power, of governance and of the state. As a result, the
different actors in the society such as politicians, bureaucracy,
unscrupulous business entrepreneurs and the civil society remains
isolated and sometimes polarized and their economic and political
stake in government of the state converged for personal gain and
people totally ignored.
One can not exaggerate the importance of social and political
institutions in economic development “Modern economic growth
demand a stable, but flexible, political and social framework, capable
of accommodating rapid structural change and resolving the conflicts
that it generates while encouraging the growth promoting group in the
society” (Kuznett). For various socio culture and economic reasons
most politicians in Bangladesh show little respect for democratic
norms and institutions.
Any form of opposition is seen with suspicion. What most
politicians believe in is not governance as a form of competitive
politics under established rules, but a one party rule in presence of a
token opposition so that they can monopolize over both the
governance and the spoils of governance. It alienates people from the
ruling elites and in the process makes them cynical about the behavior
of the politicians. This is why most people have remained outside the
preview of the state in terms of their entitlements and obligations.
People hoped for a political break through and the beginning of a
stable political system. But for from a strong, effective and clean
government what the people got was an indecisive, inefficient and
complacent government. The consecutive political parties failed to
capitalize the good will of the people far a comprehensive economic
change and to capitalize the changing political mood of the people and
a stable reform oriented government came nowhere in sight. The
responsible behavior of the politicians is not only for their political
interest but obligations to a young nation that must came first and
prevail. Politicians have remained indulgent in petty personal politics
and lost their sense of purpose and direction. Politics has became a
self-serving business proposition in a rent seeking society. Political
parties sprang up mainly because it is still a very attractive business
proposition. Most of the leaders of parties have no professing of their
own and known source of income. In the name of politics they collect
fund or donation, and live comfortably without paying any tax to the
state. As politics has become a soap opera whose chief end is pursuit
of wealth, the governance of the state has been privatized. The
deterioration in the governance of the politics has contributed to the
gradual demobilization of the state. Government has degenerated into
an aggregation of a large number of individuals and groups moved by
their own private agendas rather than the direction of an omnipresent
state. The government is now an abstraction. Governance does not
derive direction of a coherent center with a clearly articulated vision
of society and a set of programs designed to materialize the vision.
Governance is no more than the aggregate of a large number of
discrete actions whose inspiration remains individual rather than
social.
Internal governance is non-existent. Within each party there is
a dominant personality who develops and maintains a well-defined
patron-client relationship with lower level leaders and workers. The
leader is the supreme authority whose personal blessing is the key to
political advancement in the party or in government. Such a system
gives way to a praetorian rule, thus creating a vicious circle of fission,
fusion and proliferation that ultimately result in political restlessness
and instability. Hence, there has to be change in both destructive
politics and politics of patronage. A well-fined and adaptive political
rules ensure organizational stability and political discipline and
responsibility get priority over speculative practices of politicians in
distributive politics.
 Search for a theory of development involves the identification
of key factors and politics, which directly and indirectly promotes
economic growth and development. It is unlikely that some individual
will discover a magic formula. Governance has played a major part in
the design and formulation of theories and ideas in development
economies. In large measure the high performing Asian economies
achieved high growth by getting the democratic basic rights. It is
largely due to superior accumulation of physical and human capital.
The secret is deferred gratification, the willingness to sacrifice a little
of current satisfaction for future gain. In a functional governance we
find:
i. Enhanced rate of capital accumulation,
ii. Enhanced rate of domestic savings,
iii. Appropriate technology for agriculture and industry,
iv. Quality labour force,
v. Export oriented production strategy,
vi. Sound fiscal and monitory policy,
vii. Equitable distribution of income,
viii. Steady build up of private enterprise,
ix. Trained political leadership and
x. An omnipresent government.
Bangladeshi people in general and policy makers and
politicians in particular must come to the realization that solving of
deep-rooted socio-economic problems is not easy. Development
means pain and sacrifices for one generation. Any deferment would
require greater pain and sacrifices in future. We must not forget that
material prosperity followed by consumption brings economic growth.
Economic discontent arises out material want and unsatisfied
consumption. Social discontent arises out of economic discontent
followed by social frustration that gives birth to social discontent. All
these lead to political instability.
The above indicate that the transition of an economy from
stagnation to prosperity is not a smooth process. Here lies the
importance of democratic institutions. They act as shock absorber for,
as well as a facilitator of economic development. Types of institutions
depend on a country’s history, culture and stage of socio political and
economic developments. Institution necessary for both economic
development and socio political stability depends on whether the state
or market plays the dominant role in democratic resource allocation,
utilization and income distribution. If state takes the dominant role it
must ensure political institutions which can insulate the state from rent
seeking groups so that resources are efficiently allocated and utilized.
It is needed to ensure an incentive structure that promotes innovation,
efficiency and work effort. Most social, economic and political
institutions respond to economic progress. Once an underdeveloped
economy breaks the vicious circle of economic, social and political
stagnation and creates some dynamism, many socio cultural
institutions which might have been unconductive begin to play a
positive role individually and by reinforcing each other and thus
strengthen the forces working for growth. When market plays the
dominant role in resource allocation and utilization, some institutions
are created and developed through market mediated transactions. The
government may improve the functioning of those institutions through
framing appropriate laws and regulations and applying them where
and whenever necessary.
One cannot necessarily assume that state officials, who as
private citizen maximize their own welfare, would behave in the
interest of the nation inside the public office. Quite often their
predatory behavior leads to a degree of state intervention. One can
find cascading regulations whose usefulness is not clear even to the
regulators. They only serve as instruments of corruption by officials
and rent seeking activities of private sector. Therefore, rules must be
simplified and the objectives of such rules made clear. The
government departments must leave clear demarcation of functions
which will enhance accountability and transparency. We must recall
that public sector enterprises enjoy a soft budget constraint as they are
given the responsibility of providing a social safety net for an
expanding labour force unable to find a job in a stagnant economy.
Their economic failures and inefficiency are never questioned and
they are bailed out with serious implications for the health of macro
economy.
A competitive democratic political system under well defined
rules and norms can accommodate the political aspirations of the
people. Thus quality democratic political leaders are likely to replace
“agitation morons” who thrive on chaotic street politics rather than on
the high ideals of governance. There are no substitutes of an extensive
training in economics. Constitutional form do not guarantee
governance. People should have an expectation and tradition of
governance. A long period of bad governance sets a low standard of
public behaviors and diminishes the chances for establishing better
govt.
This is clear in Bangladesh that we have to strive hard and the
civil society groups must play their role in paving the way towards
governance. Major problems of governance here is:
(1) The over developed and structured and corrupt bureaucracy is
the root cause of political uncertainty. The bureaucracy has a
tendency to thwart democratic policies and destroy the
process of development of political institutions. Uncertainly
of political stability has crippled the economic growth. The
growth is slow; investment inadequate, confidence weak and
security of people is nearly absent.
(2) Parliamentary system is also a curse of slow economic
growth. The party leadership can even disregard the views of
its own members since it would unseat a member who may
think and act otherwise.
(3) Unskilled manpower, low literacy, unreasonable labour
unrest, costly and ineffective legal system, inadequate
communication of information makes people indifferent.
(4) Lack of sustained leadership commitment, lack of public
participations hinders growth of democratic practice.
The disintegrations of colonial rule bought about a strange and
incongruous convergence of aspirations. The leaders of the
independence movement were to transform their devastated countries
into modern nation state, while the masses, which had often paid for
their victories with their blood, were hoping to liberate themselves
from both the old and the new forms of subjugation. As to the former
colonial masters, they were seeking a new system of domination, in
the hope that it would allow them to maintain their presence in the
colonies, in order to exploit there natural resources as well as to use
them as market for their expanding economies or as bases for their
geo-political ambition. The myth of development emerged as an ideal
construct to meet the hopes of these three categories of actors.
For an important group, economics was the key to any kind of
development. For another, cultural and the social conditions proper to
each country had to prevail in any process of development. There are
others who wanted expert based and professionally managed
development and yet another group were for an endogenous, human
centered participatory bottom up or sustainable form of development.
This so called unanimous support for development was far from being
shared at the grass root level, where it was supposed to reach the
suffering populations. The ‘ruled’ were never consulted by the
‘rulers’. When the ‘National’ leaders of anti colonial struggles took
over the movements emerging from the grass root, they succeeded in
making them believe that material development was the best answer
to the demands. In absence of a long awaited source of regeneration-
moral and ideological, for which they had been looking for so long
appeared to be a deceitful mirage. The mirage ultimately transformed
into a recurring nightmare for millions. It had acted as a factor of
division rather than of liberation of any kind. It had mainly served to
strengthen the new alliances that were going to unite the interests of
the postcolonial foreign expansionists with those of the local leaders
in need of them for consolidation of their own power and positions.
This is how, under the banner of governance and progress, a tiny
minority of local profiteers, supported by their foreign patrons set out
to devastate the very foundation of social life. A merciless war was
waged against the age old traditions of solidarity. The victors of
simplicity and conviviality, of the wisdom of relying on each other
were derided as signs of under development. A cultural of individual
success and of socially imputed needs led younger men to depart their
villages, leaving behind dislocated families of women, children and
older men who had no one to rely on but the promise of often
unattainable goods and services. Millions of men and women thus
mortally wounded in their bodies and souls, falling en masse into a
destitution for which they had never been culturally prepared. Thus
the gap between the haves and the have nots continue to reach ever
more intolerable proportions, but the development ideologists attribute
its failures only to political or other causes external to the
development ideology. The latest of this ideology is the concept of
global village, globalization. People of third world countries are
fearful of this term. Their words may be taken as subversive. But as
cardinal Arns of Sao Paulo defined it in his courageous statement in
the meet of Society for International Development in 1983 “Subvert
means to turn a situation round and look at it from the other side, the
side of the people who have to die so that the system can go on. Our
voices are human centred. They represented a perception of reality
from the perspective of human being involved in the process of
change. Our ideas are radical, not in the polemic sense often intended
to discredit free thinking, but in the etymological sense, “going to the
roots” (Latin-radix) of the question pertains to or effect what is
fundamental. We would strive to create a generation that would go
quite far to defend the great ideologies most of which drew their
strength from the deeply humanistic traditions of all the world’s
cultures. We are not prone to discredit the virtues of the present
centuries but certainly to discover their extra ordinary corrupting
possibilities, particularly when they tend to colonize one’s
autonomous capacity to search for the truth". According to Marshall
Sahlin, ‘hunter/gatherer people were not poor, rather they were free.
They were indeed leading quite a simple and frugal life, yet as a rule,
their material needs were satisfied’. According to Moroccan
economist Hassan Zaoual, “the economic logic rests on the social soil
and the “rational” is nothing but the “relational”. What is rational
must be ‘relational’.”
Million of individuals and groups experiences, great traditions
of wisdom and virtue have converged to develop customs, beliefs,
institutions and methods of social control that cannot be dismissed or
worse, replaced from outside. The new concept of governance that is
thurst into the people, only reduces their perception of a good life to
abstract economic formula but threatens to destroy ‘the flow of
civilized life. This ideology is becoming an immensely energizing tool
of policy and counter policy, a particular expert style which took away
from the majority the right to choose and even to understand why their
own experiences were increasingly being negated. A common search
for good has vanished. There is not even a mini space in which we
care to agree on the pursuit of common good. Growth has been
identified with the good it claims to represent is not the quality of life
but the quantity of gadgets considered as useful by the mere fact that
they are being produced and consumed. Thus it is ceasing to be an
embodiment of civil society and a protector of the poor, the weak and
the oppressed. At a deeper level, scientific knowledge, is itself a
source of violence.
Indigenous people have always been intimately aware of their
symbiotic relationship with the earth based upon a delicate balance
between all living things. This understanding did not arise from a
romanticized version of our relationship to the earth; it developed
before contact with other societies and was based upon the basic law.
Through the process of cultural evolution we have develop our
customs, belief, institutions and method of social control; our sense of
belongings and connectedness to the earth that arises out of the
original law to deal with plants, animals, minerals, human beings and
all life as if they are a part of ourselves, how we care for and utilize
the plants, animals and mineral gifts. We can’t simply think of
ourselves and our survival. Each generation has a responsibility to
ensure the survival of the next generation.
Every thing can grow even by ceasing to develop. Applied to
the social field, development is the modified growth of the economic
organism. Development is a growth that is corrected, regulated and
healthy and therefore a good growth. Economic development is the
trickle down effect of industrial growth. Growth has some social
effect; it benefits everyone to a greater on lesser degree. The benefit
of growth trickles down to the poor automatically benefiting from
creation of jobs and the increase in goods and service. But
development cannot be reduced to simple economic growth, it must
promote all sphere of all man and the whole men. The take off of the
western economy was a result of generalization of on ethics: one of
work and the entrepreneurial spirit practiced with scrupulous honesty,
of enjoyment in making an effort, of rectitude, punctuality,
renouncing sensual pleasure and of the habits of savings. They
attained the reality of good of well being which is really ‘well
having’, the quantity of gadgets considered as useful by the mere fact
that they are being produced and consumed. Economist are unanimous
in agreeing that ‘accumulation’ cannot be achieved without a large
inequality in incomes. But the ideas should be rather than disputing
the shares in a small cake, it would to be better to agree on making the
cake bigger so that everyone has more and all have enough of it.
Growth depends on faith in progress and in techno science.
A democratic state in modern times has been a source of both
law and legitimacy of authority and the monopoly over coercive
power, a source also of security for the people, of systems of justice,
equity and accountability, and through them all, of condition of
freedom and creativity, the arts and the pursuit of excellence. It has
been the premier institution through which multiplicity and plurality
of the civil domain ordered in both perception and reality. Governance
began as both a philosophical idea and a political construct to deal
with wide spread condition of chaos and uncertainly and to provide
conditions of peace, order and security and of growth and
development. The nation state provided indentity in the world. The
state has either reduced all other corporate identities to individualized
identities or to some extent it admitted the existence of the corporate
identities in the form of a complex called civil society, it has
purported to be both the embodiment and the protector of such civil
society including embodiment of culture and their plurality. Out of
these search for centrality and legitimacy, despite so much diversity
all around, theoretical models defining the relationship between the
state and the individual or the state and the citizens emerged. We have
had the formal democratic liberal institutional model of the state based
on theory of accountability and the social democratic model of the
state assuming responsibility for social transformations and the
welfare of the people. In recent decades, with the growing
sensitization in the human dimensions, the struggle for civil and
democratic rights is being waged with a view to ushering in a
decentralized sustainable and people centered structure of institutions
that would promote social transformation--that is functional liberal
governance.
The state while it displaces growing use and misuse of the
coercive apparatus, continues to be a mediator among the contending
groups. Some of these claim the “rights” of diverse citizen groups and
others the “privileges” of a less divers yet differentiated structure of
entrenched interest and classes and bureaucracies. It is an increasingly
problematic yet still relevant arena encompassing the large diversity
of both contending coalescing population and interest based on the
democratic aspirations of countless millions of people. The common
people, particularly the “dalits”(The downtrodden lower caste
untouchable in the Hindu fold) the general mass of the poor and
oppressed, the minorities and woman rests a considerable faith in the
state. But there is growing skepticism and doubt about its efficacy that
wishes the marginalization in the state role and status in civil society
accompanied by growing myopia, dehumanization and brutalization in
its relationship with the civil society, at the grassroots representing
new stirrings of consciousness and new assertions of power.
Governance as an institution is under sever strain. Never
beforehand a leadership in control of power and authority and an array
of instrumentalities to wield that power itself is about to dismantle the
whole apparatus, allowing them to go their own ways, completely
shifted its ideological moorings and proceeding to disperse the whole
frame work of power and authority and the sinews of the state. The
crisis is accentuated by the rise of old and new powerful forces,
foreign lackies, fifth columnists and agents of geo-economics and
cultural hegemonism, that have emerged in the main area of the state,
is threatening governance and its survival as an institution, its role and
positions in human affairs.
The modern state, particularly a nation as a centralized
structure faces serious challenges from three major sources:
(1) Technology seems to be replacing politics, socio-
economics and culture in the functioning of modern society, seriously
affecting the role of state in civil society. The impersonal forces of
technology and bureaucracy that were always there but were some
how held in check by ideological and political factors in a democratic
system that was competitive, pluralistic and open to debate and
controversy. Technology had ever been the instrument of man to serve
people, now it has taken by the imperial or hegemonist geo-economic
powers, upon themselves the task of organizing the whole world in
their own interest. The fast changing nature of global competition is
subjecting the whole of mankind and civilization to a captive state,
deeply affecting governance and leadership, pushing the civil society
and the citizens to oblivion by homogenizing diverse culture and
social sectors and marginalizing the political process.
(2) There is rising of assertion of cultures, ethnicity sub-
nationalities, pluralism with a vengeance, when entire society are
bursting their scams, while the tensions and violence generated by the
cult consumerism is spreading and destabilizing social arrangements.
The resulting state of anomie is precipitating the violence of terrorism,
governance is ceasing to be able to contain it and to be an
embodiment of civil society and a protector of the poor, the weak and
the oppressed.
(3) The other major challenge is a mindset, away from the old
ideology of liberty, equality and fraternity, away from the role of
governance in promoting these values; in making human greed and
avarice the prime movers of man and societies and yet offering to
mankind a new ideology i.e. globalization. It promise of a new
integration of human enterprise, of joining diverse cultures and
civilizations into one single market place, nudging along governments
and elites and indeed the masses to catch up with this new fantasy. In
reality it is not integration based on diversity and on diverse entities
finding a common ground, but rather one based on cut throat
competition and rivalry, using whichever means work, giving a new
lease of life to the old extinct theory of survival of the fittest. The poor
and the already dispossessed are now considered to be a surplus and to
be dispensed with. To survive, governance must emerge as a
philosophical idea to deal with the situation of growing chaos and
uncertainty and confusion, promising both order and justice in
conducting the affairs of globalization. It must expose the modern
project of the hegemonist geo-economic forces to throw the world
once again to chaos and confusion and of course uncertainty and
without order of justice and adopt corrective measures now.
The profound crisis of human identity brought on by living
within a lie, a crisis which in turn makes such a life possible, certainly
possess a moral dimension as well it appears as a deep moral crisis in
society. A person who has been seduced by the consumer value
system, whose identity is dissolved in an amalgam of accoutrements
of mass civilization and who has no roots in the order of being, so
sense of responsibility for anything higher then own personal survival
is a demoralized person. The system depends on this demoralization,
deepens it, as in fact a projection of it into society. Living within the
truth, as humanity reflects against an enforced position rediscovering
human identity is an attempt to regain control over one’s own sense of
responsibility. Any alternative political idea must consider the nature
and future prospects of these ideas and that must necessarily reflect
the moral dimension as a political phenomenon. The development
ideology shattered this familiar universe where human relation
predominated and where the strong desire to tackle common needs
together formed the part of the language of mutual help and hope. At
the local or national level, it soon appeared to many that the
development idea carried with it new forms of domination and
descretion they had never previously known. Some were programmed
to become rich and have greater purchasing powers. But people’s
actual power to take autonomous decisions concerning their own lives
considerably reduced, as all the power centers moves towards the
modern techno political and economic apparatuses set up around the
capital of the nation state and thus developed unprecidented form of
control and subjugation over their population.
While these national governments were increasing their
domination over their own people, they become weaker and more
dependent on foreign preservations. As the need for money to
strengthen their repressive forces and bases and, with national
resources often far below development needs, most had to accept the
drastic conditions that were imposed on them by their former colonial
masters camouflaged now called as “partners in development”. As a
result, the new nation state, which its people originally welcomed as
an institution to protect them against foreign predators, itself become
a permanent threat to everyone, and any questioning of its relevance
system called for out right repression even extermination. It is the
third world where human ingenuity can peacefully outwit machined
might. Only free men can change their minds and be surprised to see
while no men are completely free, some are freer than others.
Bangladesh became independent in 1971. Over the years
successive regimes-political, military and pseudo political have
produced a plethora of politics embracing almost every dimension of
public life. There policies did not care for ideological orientation but
for political interests of the ruling party. Politics of the three types of
regimes were attuned to attain goals that were parochial in nature and
short term. Certain insignificant policy areas have received priority
over others relatively important. The outcome in most cases proved
counter productive, thus abating public expectations and raising
suspicion on the credibility of the government. The basic issues and
problem of governance are yet to be completely resolved.
Being one of the most impoverished nations in the world it is
not atypical for the government to play a dominant role in society.
The state is involved in a myriad of activities ranging from meeting
the basic need of the people to managing a large and growing public
sector. Inevitably it is the largest employer, investor and entrepreneur.
It has to function socio-economic equality, poor industrial and
agriculture performance, and continuing dependent on foreign aid and
above all administrative dysfunction that pose question about the
efficacy of policies.
An important point is the mighty iniquitous social
configuration. Political and economic power is concentrated in a few
hands. The vast majority of the people languish on the peripheries of
social scene. It is a go by situation to the imperatives of social justice.
Without establishment of a just social order to enable the marginalized
multitude to be drawn into the mainstream of national activity the
vision of national progress and development will forever remain a
mirage. The rich and powerful are fortifying their position by
integrating themselves with undemocratic foreign financial
institutions. We have almost surrendered our right to judge whether
their dictates handed down to us advance or impede the country’s
interest. Once we seriously embark on a comprehensive, program of
developing our human capability and use it better it is possible to get
out of this rut and can have a freer hand in the framing of policies and
formulation of development programs and their implementation in
keeping our own needs and interests. All out hard efforts must be
made at the local level to mobilize the people in a manner as would
encourage them to take part in infrastructure building and resource
generating activities. Expansion and diversification of local level
development activities by making maximum use of vast reservoir of
unutilized human and material resources are of crucial importance in
the context of a people oriented development strategy. Right kind of
institutions should be built as for this strategy to succeed. In many
areas of national development, appropriate policies have been framed
in relation to national needs and aspirations, but they failed in the
execution because of lack of commitment and expertise and
corruption. The leadership has been found in wanting in its capability
to ensure proper implementation of projects and programs. Even if the
strategy of people oriented and people centered development was
accepted and necessary policies and programs formulated, unless
followed through in order would not bring about the desired result.
Here lies the question of leadership. To put the nation on high road to
progress we need a truly accountable leadership at both central and
local level with both political and administrative responsibilities well
defined for each level.

Democratic institutions have to be established at all levels of

the administration keeping the bureaucracy under control, right from
the center down to the smallest unit level, so that peoples participation
in democratic governance is ensured and dilatoriness in decision
making is eliminated. Bureaucracy must not have higher hand for
establishing governance in a democratic polity. Stringent rules and
regulations should be introduced and the role of peoples
representatives in their observance must be ensured to eliminate abuse
of power by any functionary. The short sightedness and lack of
commitment of political leaders to the interests of the nation in
preference over those of self, social groups, as much as grafts and
misrule of wielders of power nipped nation’s possibilities in the bud
and have further compounded problems. New opportunities have
opened up before the nation with the introduction of liberalism in
Bangladesh politics with a clear vision. Though there is no crisis of
commitment and strategy, gap in capacity still exists. Masses should
be helped to realize their potential so that they come forward with
confidence on themselves and be ready to apply their talents and labor
to nation building activities. Leadership must be built up from among
the people. Interested quarters whether in politics and those in
position of leadership in different areas of activities and those who
constitute civil society should be inspired to take nation building as a
sacred duty and march united towards forming a true democratic state
nation. It is a great responsibility. No real actor have any excuse to
disappoint the people.