Let the People Decide the Fate of the Country, Not the Outsiders.

 Let the People Decide the Fate of the Country, Not the Outsiders.

The election year has always been subject to national crisis and foreign intervention for decades. The election year experiences a great deal of anarchy which often questions the credibility of the election. The credibility of an election has always been subject to debate and confusion, which further gives the foreign parties also known as “Our Development Partners” a scope to predominantly monitor the election. This scope to predominantly monitor often leads to interference in the politics and internal affairs of Bangladesh, which is indeed a great threat to the sovereignty of our country.

There are displeasing instances where the external sovereignty of the country has been subject to crisis and contention. Syria has been the victim of such a crisis of external sovereignty lately due to the intervention and interference of foreign parties. And sometimes it becomes the battleground for the rival parties to conduct a cold war, either to extract resources or to prove themselves as a global guardian. 

In such a situation, no one suffers more than the inhabitants of that country. In the name of mediating the crisis, the parties often get busy protecting their very own interest. 

With regard to such eventualities, the foreign parties, in the name of finding a solution, find different ways to exploit and earn from that country. This practice has been prevalent in the history of world politics for centuries.

Some earn by selling weapons and some by interfering in the diplomatic policies of the country. There are instances where different super-powers actively interfered and changed the head of the state by using their leverage and influence, which often questions the efficacy of the Treaty of Westphalia. 

The nations experience such foreign aggression only because they themselves have miserably failed to reach a consensus and conclusion. There will be differences in opinions between political parties, but there also has to be a practice that encourages the ruling party and the opposition to come to a common ground for the better future of the country.

The parties often fail to come to a common ground and for which it is the netizens who have to pay the price. For centuries, the inhabitants of the nation have to pay the price because the special interests of the parties win over the collective national interests. This tendency to prioritize special interests opened the door for external parties to participate in the internal affairs of the country, which undoubtedly questions the very status quo of the sovereignty of the country.

Bangladesh experiences a similar crisis during the time of the election. Every time the ruling party and the opposition fail to reach a consensus and thus gives access to foreign parties to interfere in the politics of Bangladesh. Recently, Russia made a remark stating that the US and EU are actively interfering in the politics of Bangladesh. On the other hand, other stakeholders believe that along with the US, EU, countries like India, China and Russia also demonstrated their intention to interfere in the internal matters of Bangladesh.

Whether it is a business organization or a state, there will be a conflict of opinions and views. This difference of opinion and conflict must be reached to a consensus by the stakeholders of the relevant organization. Failing to do would question the future of the organization. In this way, the state needs to solve its internal issues on its very own instead of involving foreign parties. 

The practice of foreign intervention during the election in the name of monitoring the election has been prevailing for a long time. To mitigate this crisis, the foreign parties are actively applying different soft power and hard power diplomacy in different ways, which has been questioning the sovereignty of our country to a great extent. If such practice is continued in the coming years, the status quo of the democracy and foreign policy of the country will be at stake. This practice itself is a disrespect to the independence of our country.

The situation can only be addressed by means of democracy and nothing but democracy, which is the basis of the independence of Bangladesh back in 1971. If we closely observe the previous election, we will see that the basis of the crisis is the method and mechanism of conducting elections. Often the incumbent government advocates participating in the election under the independent election commission office but not an independent government. On the contrary, the opposition believes that there would be lack of neutrality if the election takes place under the incumbent government. Therefore, they advocate for an independent government during the time of the election. There were instances and events where a caretaker government was appointed to conduct an election which attracted both criticisms and acclamation.

In 1996, the then government of Bangladesh introduced relevant provisions for the formation of a party-neutral caretaker government to conduct a free and fair election.  However, in 2011, the 13th Amendment of the constitution abolished the practice of appointment of the caretaker government. The incumbent government at present believes that the concept of a party-neutral caretaker government is not feasible and unconstitutional. On the other hand, the opposition party has made a contrary remark with respect to the incumbent government's view regarding the formation of a party-neutral caretaker government. Since the parties are not willing to come to a consensus, it is time to let the people decide what they want. 

Although the people get to participate in the election to choose their representative, the time has come, which needs mass public opinion to affirm the method followed by which the election would be conducted. The time has come to ask the general public what they want. In this case, it is only possible by virtue of a referendum. A referendum is a direct vote by the electorate on a proposal, law, or political issue. Along with some other laws, the provision which would allow the practice of referendum was also abolished in 2011 by the 15th Amendment of the Constitution.

The need for a referendum is immense to mitigate this existing political unrest. Therefore, the government must once again introduce a provision that allows the practice of referendum, which would further allow people to voice their opinions regarding whether a caretaker government is needed or not by casting their valuable votes.

This step will play a pivotal role in the political settlement in many ways. Firstly, it will let the general public participate in such an important decision-making process. This sort of constitutional practice is very important to address the ongoing crisis. 

Secondly, this will help to get a feel for the capability of the election commission office. If the election commission office can prove its mettle in this referendum, the opposition parties will gain confidence to participate in the election. This will also serve as a dry run for the election commission before the main election. If they can win back the confidence of the parties and the public, this election commission office could later be appointed as the caretaker government following the vote of the referendum.

In this way, all the parties can reach a consensus and bring back the long-lost political stability. Therefore, it is high time to let the people of the country decide their own fate, instead of outsiders.

The author is a Senior Law Student at the London College of Legal Studies (South) and a Civil-Commercial Mediator of ADR ODR UK. The author can be reached at fateenfarhan62@gmail.com