Democracy in Bangladesh

Democracy in Bangladesh was first introduced when the British ruled South Asia from 1700 to 1947, where Bangladesh was among the first British colonies in the subcontinent. It was then where the Westminster style of democracy was introduced that was prevalent in Britain at the time. Since Bangladesh achieved its independence on 26 March 1971 from Pakistan; Bangladesh introduced parliamentary democracy into its political system, however, a military coup in 1975 halted the process.[1]

History

Bangladesh achieved sovereignty from Pakistan in 1971, a country established with a democratic framework.[2] As a result, Bangladesh was also established with democratic institutions at its core. Bangladesh's first leaders came from the Awami League party, a party which played a pivotal role in the campaign for a separate Bengali state. The Awami League party oversaw the implementation of a parliamentary system of democracy as stated in the Provisional Constitution of Order of 1972. Soon after, the 1972 constitution was passed by the Constituent Assembly on 4 November 1972.[3]

After the initial years of democracy, Bangladesh experienced two decades worth of authoritarian rules which included stints of military regimes. The country experienced military coups in 1975; when the military used corruption and bad ruling to justify the takeover and later on General Ziaur Rehman was elected as president in 1977, and in 1982; where a martial law was announced by General H.M. Ershad after a coup to overthrow the previous regime held by General Ziaur Rehman. Bangladesh then started to transition to parliamentary democracy again in 1991, however, a political crises in 2007 saw the country under a state of emergency, whereby, a 'military backed' caretaker government was installed until the leader of the Awami League party, Sheikh Hasina, became prime minister in the 2009 elections.[3]

Military and Democracy

The political system of Bangladesh allowed the military to become increasingly involved in the political framework of the country. Since the re-emergence of parliamentary democracy in 1991, the existence of the two major political parties (Awami League and the Bangladesh National Party) - which held two polarising ideologies - allowed civilian unrest to grow as two ideologically different camps were established, causing a high polarisation of the country. The struggle between the Awami League and the Bangladesh National Party made civilians become partisan.[4] Along with civilian polarisation, institutions were also affected by the animosity between the two political parties as civilian institutions were continually polarised and politicised; including the army. The army initially grew fearful of instating civilian control as people would often regard the army to be playing partisan politics. As a result, both the civilians and the armed forces were less interested in instituting a civilian democracy. This resulted in substantial amount of civilian unrest, such as that seen in 2007, and because of which soldiers were increasingly drawn to intervene in politics to supposedly safeguard Bangladesh's democracy.[5]

During the post 2009 era, laws similar to the one's established in the democratic era of 1991 to 2006 had been instated which ensured more civilian control over the armed forces. A civilian elected prime minister became the head of state once again. Although former military officers remained in some political parties, the military did not possess any authority in the leadership of the parties as the parties became increasingly dynastic-ally operated. Civilian governments also tended to reduce the influence of the military in politics and took steps to allow more civilian institutional control of the military. However, in the political era after the 2009 era, it was seen that the military consistently favoured the ruling party in the government.[5]

Democratic Values

Although Bangladesh has been under authoritarian regimes, it has been a democratic entity for a majority of the time since the country's foundation. The state of democracy can be judged by looking at the violations of the core principles of democracy as laid out by the United Nations.

Freedom of expression and association

Bangladesh has suffered from assaults on university students - who are regarded as the pioneers of grassroots movements in the past - in order to change their political opinions. After the 2019 elections were held, reports of vote rigging emerged which sparked protests by the Left Democratic Alliance. However, cases of police brutality and assaults on protesters were seen, as at least 50 activists were left with serious injuries.

In September 2018, the Bangladeshi government introduced the Digital Security Act. However, some laws in the act criminalised the freedom of expression as several cases of civilians being charged were revealed for posting anti-government comments online. In 2019, Bangladesh ranked 44 out of 100 in net freedom, with 0 out of 100 representing extremely limited net freedom.[6]

Free and independent media

Journalism in Bangladesh has been under immense pressure as evident in the rankings of the country in the World Press Freedom Index. Bangladesh stood at 144 out of 180 countries in 2016, and the rankings only slipped as Bangladesh received 146 in 2018, 150 in 2019, and 151 in 2019. Amnesty International reported that the main hindrance to free journalism is that several media outlets in Bangladesh are affected by owners and political influence, which hinders the diversification of opinions. In 2016, some reporters argued that Bangladesh's press freedom had never been more restricted since the country's return to civilian rule in 1991. Amnesty International also revealed that the press is often intimidated by threats of physical violence and criminal cases against journalists.[7] In 2011, the restrictions on press freedom drew international criticism after the then US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton voiced her concern on the state of the freedom of press in the country.[8]

Voters standing in queue to cast their votes

Free and fair elections

Bangladesh elections in 2014 were marred with allegations of irregularities, such as voter suppression, fake votes and capturing of pooling booths. The Bangladesh National Party (BNP) and its allies boycotted the 2014 elections as their demands of a caretaker government in place to oversee the elections were not met. This resulted in the Awami League to win the general election even as 153 out of the 300 parliamentary seats went uncontested. According to electoral agencies, only 10% of the eligible population cast their ballot in the 2014 general elections.[9]

Furthermore, leading up to the 2018 general elections, the opposition parties questioned the Election Commission (EC) on their neutrality as they believed them to be increasingly one-sided towards the ruling party. Media coverage and reports from human rights organisations revealed the Awami League's elaborate plan for voter suppression and arrests of opposition activists in the lead up to the 2018 general election. The ruling party and its allies won 288 out of the 300 parliamentary seats, which raised serious concerns over the legitimacy of the election held as previous election held by the caretaker governments from 1991 to 2008 usually resulted in less than 48% of the seats going to the election winner.[10]

Independence of judiciary

The constitution of Bangladesh allows the President to appoint the Chief Justice of Bangladesh after receiving advice from the Prime Minister. Concerns of politically motivated court cases have continually emerged, and concerns regarding the politically appointed judiciary favouring the concurrent government is a contested debate in Bangladesh. In 2010, 6788 out of the 10,489 cases reviewed by a committee relating to the ruling party were dropped as the law ministry suggested that the cases were 'politically motivated'.[11]

The lower and higher courts have faced multiple allegations of corruption and bribery. Several ruling party members who had allegedly been involved in land grabbing scandals and corruption were not held 'accountable' in 2010.[11]

Transparency and accountability in public administration

Using positions of power to grant favours to relatives, supporters and friends is considered a norm in Bangladeshi politics. Most leaders of Bangladesh have been alleged into being involved in large corruption scandals either directly or indirectly.[12]

Respect for human rights and freedom

Violations of human rights in Bangladesh take the forms of extra-judicial killings and custodial torture and deaths. An estimated of 154 extra judicial killings in 2009 and another 127 deaths were confirmed through extra-judicial in 2010, with larger numbers expected.[13]

Although local laws prohibit physical violence or mental torture of detainees and prisoners by state agencies, these laws were routinely broken, and in certain cases, the victims would effectively 'disappear'. From 2007 to 2008, several top businessmen and politicians were subjected to trials for charges such as financial corruption, tax evasion and bribery. Several of the top political leaders were then subject to mental and physical torture during detention.[13]

Cases such as those of police brutality in early 2019 were evident, as police used force to disperse 50,000 protestors, resulting in one death and over 50 injuries.

Quality of Democracy

Bangladesh had a large voter turnout in 2009 and 2018 of 80%.[14] However, the differentiation in political ideas for civilians to vote on became limited due to high barriers of entry requiring large amounts of resources, which left only a small segment of the population having the ability to run political campaigns. A small segment of the political class divided among the existing political parties left few new policy alternatives being presented to the public. After the elections, only a few procedures for accountability were available to the public for the elected officials. After election, members of parliament (MP) often indulged in being 'gatekeepers' of party policies in their constituency rather than serving their voters' interest. Voters often felt that their elected MPs either never visited their constituencies or visited infrequently. The same voters also felt that the interaction between MPs and their constituents is crucial for positive engagement and to monitor their performances in the parliament. In another survey of MPs, only 35 of the elected officials believed that they were being held accountable to their constituents. The members of parliament were also often unaware of all of the problems in their constituencies, due to a law permitting members of parliament to represent constituencies they are not from. Members of parliament may also be unaware of critical issues in their constituencies as they are based in Dhaka, rather than within their community.[15]

Political parties in Bangladesh are also often structured in a way that the party leadership remains dynastic. As a result, the children of political leaders are expected to be future party leaders. Rare changes in party leadership reduced the ability of younger party members to gain higher ranking positions, which also reduced diversification and differentiation of party policies.[15]

Article 70 of the constitution also prevented members of a party to vote against a policy brought forth by other party members of the same party. This also reduced the ability of parliament members on their ability to vote in the interest of their constituents, having been forced to vote in the interests of the party.[15]

References

1. "Bangladesh and its confusion on democracy | The Opinion Pages". opinion.bdnews24.com. 2015-05-23. Retrieved 2020-06-01.
2. "A short history of Bangladesh Independence Day". The Independent. 2019-03-26. Retrieved 2020-06-01.
3. Ahamed, Emajuddin (2004), May, R.J.; Selochan, Viberto (eds.), "THE MILITARY AND DEMOCRACY IN BANGLADESH", The Military and Democracy in Asia and the Pacific, ANU Press, pp. 101–118, ISBN 978-1-920942-01-4, JSTOR j.ctt2jbj1g.12
4. Rashiduzzaman, M. (March 1997). "Political Unrest and Democracy in Bangladesh". Asian Survey. 37 (3): 254–268. doi:10.2307/2645662. JSTOR 2645662.
5. Wolf, Siegfried O. (2013). "Civil-Military Relations and Democracy in Bangladesh". SSRN Working Paper Series. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2773091. ISSN 1556-5068.
6. "World Report 2020: Rights Trends in Bangladesh". Human Rights Watch. 2020-01-15. Retrieved 2020-06-02.
7. "CAUGHT BETWEEN FEAR AND REPRESSION" (PDF). Amesty International.
8. "Signing into eresources, The University of Sydney Library". login.ezproxy1.library.usyd.edu.au. Retrieved 2020-06-01.
9. Barry, Ellen (2014-01-06). "Bangladesh's Governing Party Wins Vote Amid Unrest". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2020-06-02.
10. Rabbee, Shafquat. "A deeper look at the Bangladesh election". www.aljazeera.com. Retrieved 2020-06-02.
11. Islam, Syful. "Bangladesh: Where The Judiciary Can Be An Obstacle To Justice" (PDF). Global Integrity.
12. Mahmood, Shakeel. "Public procurement and corruption in Bangladesh confronting the challenges and opportunities".
13. "State of Human Rights in Bangladesh – South Asia Journal". Retrieved 2020-06-02.
14. "Nearly 80% voter turnout". Dhaka Tribune. 2018-12-31. Retrieved 2020-06-02.
15. Meisburger, Tim. "Strengthening Democracy in Bangladesh" (PDF). The Asia Foundation.