One of the great myths–regularly perpetuated by most Western media and think-tank types who see peripheral South Asian countries through the organic lens of the British parliamentary system or its robust Indian counterpart–is that Bangladesh has independent institutions that are merely flawed. Junior reporters or freshman analysts or interns who are often starved of research resources generally assume what is written in the law, or subcontract the research to their more senior peers who are, more often than not, on the New Delhi beat. The result is an understanding of the Bangladesh institutional context that is quite devoid of the reality on the ground.
The stark truth is that in Bangladesh every rein of power, be it administrative, executive, judicial, or legislative, sits in one office and, thus, in one person. The Prime Minister decides which civil servant serves where; while her powers to fire bureaucrats is still somewhat limited, she can make any undesirable one an Officer on Special Duty (OSD) which in South Asian bureauspeak means you draw a salary but are no longer functioning in any professional capacity. All the judges at every level are appointed by the President, but, here is the caveat, the President is constitutionally bound to follow the ‘advice’ of the Prime Minister; and today every last one of almost 50 or so judges of the High Court have been personally appointed by the Prime Minister Shiekh Hasina. As head of the ruling party, the Prime Minister also selects (there are no ‘primaries’ like the US or constituency selection committees like the UK) all the 300 candidates for her ruling front’s parliamentary slate while Article 70 of the Constitution (which the Prime Minister’s father inserted in the 1970s) automatically voids the parliamentary membership of any MP who votes against the party leader. In her capacity as the “Leader of the House”, the Prime Minister appoints the Speaker and chairmen of all standing committees of parliament as well. Bottomline, there is no separation of powers of three branches of government in Bangladesh; everything is an extension of the office of the Prime Minister.
Lest you think the alphabet soup of ‘independent agencies’ is any different, think again. Beautifully named organizations like the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), and the Bangladesh Election Commission (BEC) are no different than parliament or the courts: all the members are appointed directly by the Prime Minister or by the President under the mandatory provision of accepting the ‘advice’ of the Prime Minister. The results are quite predictable in that the ACC is exclusively focused on finding corruption in Opposition politicians or businessmen who have pro-democracy sympathies, the NHRC has little time for investigating police abuses but an enormous appetite for ‘cultural human rights’ and ‘food rights’ seminars, and the BEC…well you all know how the December 30 elections went about happening.
When the Prime Minister of Bangladesh is referred to as dictator, it’s not an exaggeration; if anything it is an understatement: not even the General Secretary of Soviet Communist Party had the enormous, unchecked powers that the chief executive of the Bangladeshi junta has.
The Bangladeshi media is unlikely to bring this up for reasons ranging from sheer terror visited upon families of recalcitrant journalists to the control of newsprint paper and advertising by the junta to the fact the broadcast- and print licenses are no longer given to those who do nor display sufficient zeal for ‘chetona’ (a Bangladeshi version of the cult of ‘juche’ of North Korea or ‘jamahairya’ of Libya’s Gaddafi).
Your best, clearest and most cogent post so far. This really needs to reach a *much* wider audience — aside from friends forwarding the link, how can we get this SEEN?
Thank you! Working on finding some more ways to promote it!