Background

Election to the eighth national Parliament took place on 1 October 2001 and it returned a four party Alliance led by BNP with three-fifth majority. It is generally surmised that the victory, particularly by such a wide margin, was managed through planned and targeted rigging of election by the BNP-Jamat coalition with help from the Caretaker Government led by Justice Latifur Rahman. Even then Awami League emerged as the largest popular party scoring 40.28 percent of votes as against 46.9 percent obtained by the four parties Alliance.

Though Bangladesh began its independent existence as a parliamentary democracy, it lost this character at the beginning of the third year. After the fall of military autocracy in 1990 the nation reverted to the parliamentary form and the fifth and seventh parliament functioned for full terms. In between there was a parliament for only 11 days that was elected in a voterless election. Parliamentary tradition, therefore, does not have a long history in Bangladesh.

Immediately following the October election there was widespread persecution and repression of political opponents initially begun with persecution of the members of the minority communities who are traditionally supporters of the Awami League. People were killed, maimed and raped by goons of BNP-Jamat and their properties were looted, destroyed and occupied. Thousands were driven out of their homes and harassed by law-enforcing agencies of the Government. There was no redress to be sought from any quarters and even peaceful protest was not tolerated. AL leaders and workers in thousands were arrested and implicated in false cases. And prominent leaders, not only politicians but also liberal professionals and journalists, were arrested and tortured in police custody. The repression of journalists, including murder of reporters and forcible occupation of offices, created a climate of fear in the country. Even members of parliament could not escape the vengeance of the ruling party and many were put behind the bar and subjected to torture.

Awami League in Parliament

Awami League did not attend the first session of parliament as a mark of protest against the rigged election and the consequent repression and violation of human rights. They were too busy protecting themselves and their workers from the wrath of mastans supported by the police during the second session when some of their MPs were arrested. They attended the third session that also happened to be the budget session as well. But at the outset they were ready to discharge their duties as elected representatives of 41 percent of the population. They also made suggestions as early as February 2002 for constitution of the parliamentary committees.

As a democratic party AL believes that parliament is the forum where matters of vital national importance should be discussed and decided upon. AL in its history of more than half a century has never thought of or been part of any extra-constitutional manner of disposal of state business. Even in the rubber stamp parliaments of military dictators when election results were manufactured at will Awami League contested in elections and participated in parliamentary debates. Under parliamentary democracy it is but natural for AL to consider that only through intervention in parliament that the party can meaningfully participate in the policy making process of the nation and serve the people.        

This expectation, however, has been rudely thwarted by the brute majority of BNP-Jamat in parliament. From day one it has been the experience of AL that they are denied the opportunity to speak, no issue of any importance is allowed to be discussed in parliament, and they are wantonly discriminated by the Speaker. It is also obvious that even in transacting legislative business the ruling coalition is not interested in any meaningful dialogue. There is a tendency to bypass the parliament and the leader of the house prefers to settle issues in her office and the Government prefers to legislate by ordinances.

Dysfunctional Parliament

Some interesting statistics on the performance in parliament in course of the six sessions so far held amply reveals that the parliament has been made dysfunctional by the ruling coalition.

• Under rule 62 of the assembly business rules, 357 adjournment motions have been tabled but 345 of them have been disallowed for unknown reasons.
• Under rule 71, 3688 notices were filed to draw attention of the concerned Ministers to urgent matters of public interest but 2580 of them were rejected simply because they were filed by AL members.
• Under rule 68, 111 notices were given for discussion of urgent matters of public importance but 104 of these given by AL members were disallowed.
• Just because the questioner was an AL member 3455 questions have not been entertained.     

Parliamentary Committees

For over a year and a half no parliamentary committee was set up. On 2 February 2002 AL requested the Chief Whip of the Assembly to indicate the committees that would be chaired by AL and offered to name their nominees. No communication was received from the ruling party even after issue of a reminder on 12 September 2002. But on 12 May 2003 suddenly eleven committees were formed unilaterally by the ruling party. The subject was not even discussed in the meeting of the advisory council and the announcement was made when the AL had staged a walk-out from the session. In none of the committees chairmanship was given to AL. It looks that the announcement was made to catch the attention of the Development Forum meeting in Dhaka on 17 & 18 May.

Awami League had converted the parliamentary committees into real live institutions. They decided to appoint chairmen from members of parliament, not holding another state responsibility, dethorning Ministers from chairmanship of committees. They also allowed membership of the committees on proportional basis. AL also offered some chairmanship to other parties and chairman for agriculture committee was appointed from the Jatiyo Party. BNP at that time turned down the offer. Jamat was not offered any chairmanship as they had only three members. AL held elaborate discussion with BNP on vitalizing the parliamentary committees and a UNDP project was also helping the process. The parliamentary committees in the seventh parliament functioned effectively. The chairmen could give ample time and they had offices and logistic support. The committees really became effective watchdogs over executive actions.

It is true that it took almost a year to constitute the committees in the seventh parliament but that was mainly because BNP took time to nominate its members. It should also be remembered that systemic changes such as change in chairmanship or proportional representation also required time.

Awami League offered the position of the Deputy Speaker in the seventh parliament to BNP but the offer was not accepted by BNP. Awami League also tried to form a national unity Government and offered cabinet positions to other parties. One member from Jatiyo Party, one from JSD and two from BNP joined the cabinet but BNP expelled their two members for breaking ranks.

Scrutiny of Legislation by Parliament

Awami League provided for proper scrutiny of legislation in parliament. In the first session of the seventh parliament a special committee of 15 members from both the treasury and opposition benches was constituted under rule 266 to scrutinize every legislative bill. During AL period no law was passed as an ordinance promulgated by the President. Every piece of legislation, 191 in all, was processed through some committee or other. This occasionally meant delay in passing a law but this was followed to observe parliamentary procedure and decorum.

On the other hand in the eighth parliament so far 54 laws have been passed, not a single one having been discussed in any committee. Four of these laws were promulgated as ordinances, 2 in 2001 and 2 in 2003.

Interference by the Ruling Coalition

The Government side interfered with seating of members of the opposition in parliament. In the seventh parliament the opposition party decided on the disposal of seats among their members. But this time this was not done and the views of the leader of the opposition were not given any weight.

The Advisory Council on disposal of business under the BNP-Jamat regime has no authority of its own. Minor decisions on transaction of business in parliament are taken by the Government and the Council is only a rubber-stamp unit. The Speaker looks towards the Leader of the House for signals to permit discussions or to switch off microphones.

BNP and Contempt of Parliamentary Practices

Somehow BNP does not appreciate parliamentary practices and decorum. This is nothing new in the eighth parliament; in the past also they behaved in an unruly fashion like a mob in the streets. Let us look at their performance in the seventh parliament or before and it will be obvious that becoming the majority party they have not changed at all. Parliamentary niceties and tolerance have no appeal to this party and their partners JI as a practitioner of fascism, of course, do not believe in democracy.   

• In the seventh parliament BNP members went ahead to physically hurt the Speaker and this was visible all across the country on live television coverage of the proceedings of the session.
• In collusion with some wicked employees of the parliament BNP was successful in shutting down supply of electricity during session, a completely unprecedented and unexpected eventuality. This drama was staged to discredit the ruling aprty and create a scene with candlelight.
• In order to prevent direct transmission of their unruly behaviour and unparliamentary techniques the BNP members destroyed TV equipment in the assembly hall and beat up TV cameramen and technicians.
• While Khaleda Zia was the leader of the opposition once she shouted out in the most impolite and undignified fashion, “Chup Beadab” (Be quiet, Wicked lot).

In the current session indecency by BNP members coupled with crudeness and intolerance of Khaleda Zia has made the parliament a veritable star chamber. Just a few examples will tell the story.

• In the sixth session of the eighth parliament when the leader of the opposition Sheikh Hasina was speaking in parliament Khaleda Zia intervened and said in a highly impolite manner, “ar ekti kothao bolte deya hobe na” (wont be allowed to utter one more word). The Speaker immediately stopped Sk Hasina and would not even allow her to finish her sentence.
• The leader of the opposition, in violation of established convention,  has to seek permission of the Speaker whenever she wants to speak. The Speaker does not give her the floor unless the treasury bench indicates approval and switches off the microphone as per their direction even if she is in the middle of a sentence.
• It has become an indecent tradition that the Speaker continues to talk and disturb whenever the leader of the opposition is speaking. This is the way the treasury bench is throttling the voice of the opposition in parliament.

It should be borne in mind that the tradition in the seventh parliament was that the leader of the opposition had unlimited right of speech and the microphone was automatically hers whenever she would stand up. She had the freedom to raise any issue or talk on any subject at her will without interruption. For instance, she talked on the Chittagong Hill Tracts issue for almost an hour without any interruption. In the debate on floods 1998 she spoke for 50 minutes when the leader of the house spoke for only 30 minutes.

Quorum for Parliament Session

As per rule 75(2) the attendance in parliament must at least be 60 for a session to begin. The treasury bench has nearly three fifth majority but only 60 members (or about one –fourth of their strength) are never there on time for a session. Quorum crisis is a daily affair. The fourth, fifth and sixth sessions of the eighth parliament met for a total of 38 working days but not a singe meeting could start on time due to lack of quorum. It is estimated that one minute of assembly session costs Tk 15,000/. Bangladesh Chapter of Transparency International has concluded that quorum wasted Tk 23.5 million of tax-payers’ money. 

Question Hour

In the seventh parliament AL initiated the institution of Prime Minister’s question time. In the tradition of Westminister parliament any member could ask questions for the PM to respond. This became a routine matter but in the eighth parliament the routine has been broken. First, it is seldom permitted and PM’s question time is arbitrarily cancelled. Second, never has an AL member been given the opportunity to participate in this questioning. The Prime Minister, it seems, is afraid of accountability.

Miscellaneous Discriminatory Steps against the Opposition    

The Leader and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are not provided adequate logistic support or the state services they are entitled to.

In providing accommodation and transport the Government is niggardly. They are not provided computer and related services such as e-mail facility. Even the allocation of the red telephone was considerably delayed.

The MPs of the Alliance are allocated TK 1 crore each for development activities in their constituencies.  They also get allocations for relief and other works. These allocations are not made in favour of the AL MPs thus depriving their constituents of a share in development activities and public services.

Vol. 2 No. VIII. May 22, 2003
Bangladesh Awami League Publication