DEMOCRACY DEFICIT AND DEVELOPMENT

        By Kazi Anwarul Masud(  former Secretary and ambassador)

              FOR PUBLICATION ON  FRIDAY THE 9^TH DECEMBER 2011

Harvard scholars Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way( Election without democracy-The rise of competitive authoritarianism-Journal of Democracy-Vol 13-Number 2-April 2002) have argued that authoritarian governments may coexist indefinitely with meaningful democratic institutions as long as they avoid well publicized rights abuse and do not steal elections. Besides using bribery, co-optation, and other forms of “legal’ persecutions governments may limit opposition challenges without provoking mass upsurge. Competitive authoritarianism may result from the decay of full blown authoritarianism as seen from public upsurge against the regime of General Hussain Mohammad Ershad that was followed by election resulting in the installation of a seemingly representative government. Problem arose when this representative government which commanded absolute majority in Parliament started indulging in widespread alleged corruption and abuse of the rights of the people, in particular of the minority community who, though briefly in post- liberation  Bangladesh in 1971 till the assassination of the Father of the Nation and consequent change over were left largely untouched,    has been subjected to discrimination in many areas of their livelihood that would have been their right as citizens of the country. One of the reasons behind such persecution of the minority community was the doubt held by a  section  of Bangladeshis of their  loyalty  to the country . This conviction of disloyalty was sown  in the minds of the people of former East Pakistan since the partition of India in 1947 based on religion and as an attempt to concretize and legitimize the existence of Pakistan and to firm up the belief that Hindus and Muslims cannot coexist peacefully as a nation. Historians have cited many examples of peaceful coexistence of the two communities till the advent of the British rule in India who to perpetuate their rule  adopted and encouraged such constructed  division between the two religions that unfortunately has become embedded in post-partition India into Pakistan, India, and now to an extent in Bangladesh. Professor Sushil Chaudhury ( of Calcutta University-Identity and Composite Culture: The Bengal Case-presented at the Diamond Jubilee Celebration of the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh) tried to explain how the question of identity and religion are intertwined with the evolution of cultural syncretism and that from sixteenth to eighteenth centuries a composite culture evolved in Bengal. As opposed to that Professor Afia Dil ( of Alliant International University-San Diego-California) in her paper Arabic Impact on Bengali Language and Culture has demonstrated the impact of Arabic script and its influence on Bengali life and culture in general. This debate on our identity and culture becomes relevant if one considers the  debate on multiculturalism raging in the West. Language though an important element in defining identity is not the only factor in its evolution because the influence of  religion, believed to be  bred in the bone becomes no less an important factor in the evolution of identity. If Jurgen Habermass’s post-secular society in which “a worldwide resurgence of religion, the missionary expansion, a fundamentalist radicalization, and political  instrumentalization  of the potential for violence innate in some religions” are noted and have  come to stay then the common thread of linguistic similarity would not be enough  for the governance of countries like Bangladesh where 12% of the population consist of  Hindus, Christians and Buddhists. In such cases both transactional and transformational leadership is needed to enthuse the people to strive for furtherance of economic development regardless of religion, gender, ethnicity or cultural differences. One has to be careful that in quest of a national identity one does not fall into the trap of hybrid or illiberal democracy because it is easier to impose on than to  enthuse people to voluntarily adopt a common identity. But enforced laws or regulations are always transitory in nature and do not grow roots. As Levitsky and Way have pointed out there are mainly four areas of democratic contestation—the electoral arena, the legislative arena, the judicial arena, and the media. In Bangladesh the ruling party has three fourth majority in Parliament that may seemingly indicate stability but effectively means instability as the oppositional views are more likely to be voiced through street demonstrations and inevitable governmental repression in the name of maintaining law and order. The very fact that the legislation on the bifurcation of  Dhaka city into two took less than ten minutes to be passed into law in Jatyo Sangsad without debate or deliberation is indicative of a possible dysfunctional Parliament. If on examination it is later found that the bifurcation was a mistake then all the money and manpower spent on implementation  of the decision would have been in vain. In this context James Madison’s words are worth heeding to: In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. Democratic contestation in the electoral arena would not apply as elections so far held after the fall of authoritarianism have been free and fair despite opposition parties’ complaint of machinations by internal and external forces. Unfortunately in Bangladesh the democratic culture of gracefully conceding defeat is yet to take root. Likewise opposition party’s complaint of politicization of judiciary in the forms of appointment of judges and verdicts given on important legal issues do not hold water as such complaints are not backed by popular acceptance. Democratic contestation in the field of media  prevails in Bangladesh. The situation, however, has improved with the passage of time. In 2006 Freedom House rated Bangladesh with 66 points which put the country in the Not Free press group. Each country is rated in  three categories, viz legal environment 0-30, political influence 0-40, and economic pressure 0-30.with the higher numbers indicating less freedom.  A country's total score is based on the total of the three categories: a score of 0-30 places the country in the Free press group; 31-60 in the Partly Free; and 61-100 in the Not Free press group. Apart from the crisis of democracy facing Bangladesh due to inflexible attitudes of both the opposition parties and the ruling combine mainly on political issues the financial crisis facing the world  put the free-market or neoliberal model of development on trial. The Chinese model and that of some  emerging economies of reducing their exposure to foreign financial markets by accumulating large foreign currency reserves( China reportedly has $three trillion as reserve) and maintaining strong regulatory control over the banking system have posted impressive economic growth and at the same time supporting social policy have earned praise of the developing world. Hesitation to fully embrace the Chinese model by the developing countries en masse  stems from authoritative political system China has and also increasing inequality between the rural and urban sectors and profit of growth going to minority of the people that can lead to social unrest. For countries like Bangladesh devastating effects of climate change in a few decades, lack of adequate food to increasing number of people due to increasing food price and decreasing income, greater   focus on stemming population growth to a manageable level, de-industrialization  and lack of FDI  due to  inadequate infra-structure and energy, uncertain  future for manpower sector due to global meltdown and unsettled political situation in the Middle East and increasing  diplomatic initiative towards labor markets in Malaysia and South Korea, reduced exports of RMG and other products to the US and Europe due to falling  of demand will remain critical challenges for the governments in power. Better work ethics, job oriented quality education, reducing  “wastage” of public money, focused development strategy will be necessary to lead Bangladesh to a comfortable  state in years to come.