what lies ahead?

What lies ahead when after long impasse the 31 Point election reform proposal of 14 Party Alliance finally landed on the negotiation table seeking resolution? Are we going to be out of the `Uncertain Times' with this temporary sighs of relief and enthusiasm fledged around the ongoing dialogue? Needless to say, it all depends now on positive outcome waiting at the end of the tunnel of talk-mission getting held at the Parliament Bhaban.

Two rounds of parleys held on 4-5^th October ended with smiling faces after pleasant exchanges of the terms of references and sets of priorities. The third one ended with hopes. With the fourth one ending little known about how they are going to settle the issue of Chief of the CTG and the fifth one now scheduled to be held on 16^th October, 2006; the dialogue continues.

At this juncture, it may be reminded, the real expectation of the people of the country manifests, when the much awaited responsible step of return to the table of talks from the relentless street confrontation programmes has taken place, now all parties should positively focus their effort so that it should conclude with smiling faces of Abdul Jalil MP and Mannan Bhuiyan MP concluding an amicable and acceptable settlement for not taking back the issues to the streets again. Because attaining positive settlement only is going to prove, the ultimate responsible and mature behaviour of the political alliances; their acclaimed respect and reliance on democratic practice. Is there any other way around to bring peace to the public life when people are already suffering too much from the menaces of price hike of essentials, recurrent load-shedding of electricity and shortage of pure drinking water?

However, it will be also wrong to judge that any ill compromised settlement shedding `basic principles' of the reform proposal which is not ensuring free, fair, neutral and acceptable election will suit the situation. The dialogue is getting very much watched by the conscious section of the public, as such, the wishes of the citizens of the country stays firm with the dialoguing parties not only for a mere outcome but also to the very conclusion nonetheless have been made clearly with meaningful resolution of the reform issues in hand.

The main point is, we all want to see ahead that a peaceful resolution of the reform issue is made to its letter and spirit through dialogue with its smooth and effective implementation prior to the election. That is what the reform agenda is all about; which is indeed meant to be implemented for a free, fair, neutral and acceptable election, so that the people are blessed with a competent Government, a responsible opposition and a proper functioning Parliament from the run-out of the 2007 election. Nobody wants to see the oars, poles or sickles coming out on the street in future ready for pitched battles raising utter disruptions in normal public life more to jeopardize the continuity of democracy.

Are the wars of instigative words which are ongoing outside the dialogue room going to advance the talks to its proper perspective? It is difficult for us to understand. If the political alliances want to prove their vigilance through these instigative words other than peaceful mobilization for show of support which is normal in democratic practices, I reckon that is nonetheless going to heighten the egotistic attitude vitiating the atmosphere of healthy dialogue. The success of dialogue depends on proper expression of rationales behind the proposals and mobilization of public opinion favouring the logic. Show of confrontational attitude is only going to mar the situation further. Neither of the participating side has anything to win here in the dialogue except the people who want a congenial atmosphere ensured for a free, fair, neutral and credible election participated by competent candidates and not getting stigmatized with repetition of ballot-game instituted among the identified thugs who have vitiated the political parties and distorted the democratic culture.

The Prime Minister has said, time is running out and the fourteen party alliances must resolve the election reform issue through dialogue with the Government. The opposition 14 Party Alliance has no other option but to settle the reform proposal negotiating with the Government, she meant. It is true and correct; people do not want to see trouble and turmoil of street agitations, but at the same time; will the people just sit idle if the result of the dialogue do not ensure an acceptable reform and an acceptable election with participation of all the parties? During last three national elections the opposition never accepted the result with grace. If the same situation is repeated after 2007 election no doubt the people will just look upon both the Government party and the opposition with utter distrust. Consequences are dire with the status quo pushed to the end of whatever `flawed democracy' the country owns.

However, although the impasse regarding dialogue on election reform sustained quite long times of uncertainty, in any case, the commencement of it now in the Parliament Bhaban is viewed as an welcome change in the mutual attitude of the two major political alliances for making of a little of ameliorative environment of democratic culture. The responsibility of continuity of this attitude equally lies on both side of the divide. Blame game syndrome suffered by both did not go to the advantage of either of the parties hopefully by now both the alliances must have read the public opinion and realized.

I am not a believer of pre-poll analysis and predictions based on random sample or opinion polls particularly as reported by Nazim Kamran Chowdhury (The Daily Star: October 06, 2006 pp-16-17). Or Kazi's predictions based on simple math. The swings per se that determines election results are real verdict or engineered distortion that is the most important question. All these exercises of pre-poll empirical analysis based on random samples taken from limited circles of public may be for fun having sporty excitements of pre-poll election games. Nonetheless, most of them have historically misguided the stakeholders to commit blunders. Whatever are the opinions, analysis or predictions, the real result is nonetheless contingent upon people being able to vote freely without being prejudiced or unfairly influenced, and the results are not manipulated by unscrupulous influence of the Election Engineers.

As such, alongside making of the CEC, CTG and the election administration neutral, it is also the demand that information about the candidates are fed exhaustibly to the people so that they can convey informed choice favouring vote for the competent candidate. The HC verdict (May 24, 2004) on these issues of `voters right to know' must not be squandered away by the new CEC and as such the criteria of choice of the new CEC which may be agreed upon must attach commitment of `voters right to know' firmly made to the voters. The bogus voter list which the incumbent CEC is moving ahead for printing must be stopped and it must be the responsibility of the new CEC who must have to make a flawless updated voter list to clear the mess which the incumbent CEC created.

It is true; in this land in which we live, there is no positive track record of successful political negotiation with the party in power.

As a result the people had to concede tremendous sacrifices. The fact remains, today neither of the parties involved in the dialogue can claim high moral ground as far as their past performance goes. It is therefore an opportunity for both the side to give something to the people for credible election to regain their moral standing towards commitment for democracy, empowerment of the people and faithful recognition to the letters of the constitution-- that all powers in the republic belong to the people.

In fact there are a total of 51 proposals of reform included in the 31 Point package. The law Minister Moudud Ahmed agrees that out of that 40 proposals are acceptable to the Government. He urges early resolution of the dialogue with agreed proposals finalized so that necessary amendment of laws and regulations can be done at the earliest. My question is; if 40 counts out of 51 of reform proposals was already acceptable to the Government who was holding them back for last 15 months or so from going ahead with the necessary file works to initiate and execute the necessary amendments of law and regulations for those 40 such proposals? From the beginning, both the alliances are suffering from win-lose phobia. If that is going to be the reason behind delay and deadlock then why the Four Party Alliance did not come up with some of the reform proposals from their side at the first place showing their intention to bring in improvement of the election process?

The reality is, by extending encouragement to CEC to defy HC rules issued for updating of the electoral rolls and to take soft attitude regarding affidavits on candidate information causing adverse influence on the result followed by severe rigging in the Sunamgonj and Dhaka-10 bye-elections, delay in settling law suits regarding election disputes, the 15^th amendment of the constitution made to bring in Chief of CTG of their choice etc. have pushed the Government in the back seat already on the issue of reforms of election rules on qualification of the candidates, the CEC, the EC and the CTG. The dialogue is only a way out now for the Government party for a respectable exit from the mess. Nobody now believes a fair election is possible now under the incumbent CEC and the designated Chief of CTG and without reforms of election rules.

Both the Alliances should realize that the people will vote judging their respective performances during last 5 years. Amicable settlement of reform proposal shall go to the positive performance of the Four Party Alliance, because amidst all other failures people must give them credit for paving the way for a free, fair and credible election of 2007 which they could definitely claim to their credit in election campaigns if followed by an amicable settlement of the ongoing dialogue on election reforms.

Therefore, I believe the `four party alliance' will do their best for successful dialogue. There are talks about mutual concessions for reaching settlement. Concessions do not depend on the alliances alone. The civil societies and the citizens have stake in this dialogue because people have so much suffered during last 5 years for non-performing Parliament. If the concessions are perceived to have not ensured a performing Parliament, then in that case both the alliances shall have to bear the brunt of the people's discontent expressed through the votes during election. On the other hand if the dialogue fails, whoever may be at fault, nevertheless the Government will be the victim of suspicion with erosion of public support manifested through support expressed to opposition's movement as well as subsequent drastic swing of voting in the election to opposition's favour. For simple reason, that it was opposition alliance who first proposed reforms.

So is there any other way for the four party alliances but to come out victorious with a successful dialogue and cash the credit for favouring the environment for a free, fair, neutral and credible election and on that claim the swing of votes in their favour. BNP for being the much acclaimed and popular democratic political party grown out of struggle against autocratic regime; why should they suffer with defeatist syndrome when people wins?

Dhaka, 13^th October, 2006