Will he serve the Nation or his benefactors?
Answer to this will determine our future and Prof. Iajuddin's place in history

Mahfuz Anam (fwd: Gopal Sengupta)

Published on February 13, 2007

 At the outset, one thing must be made clear to the President, also the caretaker chief. His splendid isolation is over. He has voluntarily chosen, some will say with inappropriate hurry, to be in the thick of politics. Consequently, he will have to bear the brunt of what being in politics means -- most importantly, to be under constant public and media scrutiny. Compared to the Presidency being a constitutional post, the caretaker chief's is an extremely complex political one, and as such his every move, every utterance, every use of words, every action and even his silence and non-action in matters will be subject to severe examination by the people. This is all part of the job and also part of the people's right to know that strengthens democracy like nothing else does. Our politicians never understood it. We hope the President does. In the spirit of that public scrutiny the first question that Prof. Iajudding will have to answer is whether he will serve the nation or his benefactors? We admit the question is hard and even aggressive. But it is valid. The question is now ringing in the public mind and the faster he accepts it the better he will have a chance to chalk out his course of action. Please do not make the fatal mistake of brushing this aside by saying that such a question is not in the mind of the public but only in the mind of Awami Leaguers. If our readers are any guide, then this question is very much in the air.

There is no running away from the fact that the BNP leaders and especially Khaleda Zia considered him more trustworthy as President than Baddruddoza Chowdhury, BNP's founding secretary general and perhaps the closest colleague of the party's founder late President Ziaur Rahman. That, no doubt, is saying a lot. He also carries the baggage of his involvement in the Dhaka University teachers' politics where he always represented the pro-BNP panel.

Notwithstanding all this Prof. Iajuddin was and is our President and has now become the chief of the caretaker government. The future of our democracy is in his hands. He holds two most important offices -- the head of state and the head of the government. This makes him the most powerful man in the country today. But alongside the power he enjoys, he has an enormous responsibility on his 76-year-old frail and heart-attack-recovered shoulders. It is an open question that how a man who, until the other day was under doctor's advice not to work more than a few hours a day, will handle the pressure of the most complex office in the country. Yet he has taken the plunge which we interpret as his courage and desire to move us forward in the right direction (Please don't prove us wrong).

Prof. Iajuddin will do well to recall the very philosophy behind the creation of the caretaker system. He should ask why a ruling party could not be trusted to hold free and fair elections. Simply because the opposition feared that undue power and influence will be exerted by the incumbent on the state machinery and government structure, especially on the bureaucracy, police, other law enforcement bodies, with a view to affecting the outcome of the polls.

In practical terms, it means that to hold a free and fair election, a caretaker government has to create a level playing field between the party that just relinquished power and the one that was in opposition. To achieve that it has to take a whole range of measures to reduce the influence of the immediate past ruling party over the state machinery with all its paraphernalia and bring it to the level of the opposition. Therefore, one can say that by definition the caretaker government comes into effect to protect the rights of those who were out of power and curb the influence of those who held the reins of the government. It is on this particular aspect that Prof. Iajuddin's caretaker government has to give immediate and special attention.

In this regard, we would like to recall the actions of the last caretaker governments of justices Habibur Rahman and Latifur Rahman. Their first task was to gain the confidence of the opposition. For that purpose they took immediate measures to cleanse the administration and other government structures of questionable officials. They made hundreds of key transfers and opened up government radio and television for both sides. They also set up special bodies and committees to look into ways to dismantle the official setup left behind by the past governments. They took measures to recover illegal arms, round up criminals and hoodlums patronised by political parties, and many other measures to ensure a free and fair election.

We recall the most controversial decision of the last caretaker chief, justice Latifur Rahman, which was to transfer 13 government secretaries within hours of his taking oath even before he formed his council of advisers. The AL, then immediate past ruling party, reacted vehemently against it, to which Latifur Rahman paid no heed. That one particular move had a salutary effect in galvanising the opposition's confidence in the caretaker government.

Prof. Iajuddin now has to take similar and dramatic measures to gain confidence of the opposition. The need for him to take such actions is far more important than it was for the other two chief advisers as there was no controversy about their assuming the office. We think Prof. Iajuddin lost a grand opportunity in his first address to the nation on Sunday in making an imprint of his leadership on the public mind. He should have tried to distance himself from the immediate past government but instead he read out a speech that seemed to have been drafted in the old mould. A different speech could have created an early sense of confidence in the public mind, as in ours.

It is not only that President and the chief adviser has to be neutral. He has also to be very visibly seen to be neutral. We are acutely aware that it is a near impossible task given Bangladesh's divisive and confrontational politics. But he has to try and try it hard. At least he has to be seen to be trying hard. It is on Prof. Iajuddin gaining that crucial credibility that much of his capacity to deliver a free and fair election will depend.

With all the doubts and questions as expressed above we still repose our faith in, what we have earlier called, “Our last hope”. For President Iajuddin failing to deliver a free and fair election is not an option. He has to rise up to the occasion. He has to gain that vital moral high ground that will cast aside all the doubts and questions that come from his BNP links and his not having so independent a profile, and the way he came to occupy the key post of the caretaker government. We believe it can be done.

The most difficult but critical task he faces now is choosing his council of advisers. Here lies his first test. Yes, he will take suggestions from all political parties but he should choose only those who are beholden to neither side of the political divide and will genuinely help him to deliver a free and fair election. People of the highest integrity, honesty and strength of character should form his council of advisers, especially because of his frail health he will require the most competent group around. If his advisers consist of a mix of politically committed people then they will pull his government in one direction or another, making his goal of a neutral administration almost impossible. Political parties should help him by not suggesting party activists or supporters but people who enjoy general public trust, confidence and respect.

It is our hope that given the fact that he is teacher (in our culture a teacher is still a highly respected person and is expected to embody many moral qualities), given his age, given that he cannot really aspire for anything higher than what circumstances have awarded him with, given that the nation needs him to be at his moral, ethical and administrative best and given that his integrity of character and courage of person have never come under such public focus as of now, he will rise up to the occasion and create a history that will make us proud of him.

The choice is his. He can choose to serve his benefactors and be thrown into the dustbin of history or to serve the nation and be its hero. We hope and pray that he will choose what befits a teacher.