Though a lot of time has been wasted, the people of Bangladesh do appreciate the decision of AL policy makers to rejoin the parliament on October 28 and also for participating in all committees. Anyway, better late than never. One praiseworthy development that the people should take note of is the frank and open call by many AL law makers to go back to the parliament, which the leadership could not ignore. This shows maturity of the leadership and their understanding of the realities on the ground and also onset of the democratic process within the party itself. Such a development should augur well for other major parties too. Unless democracy is established within the parties, one cannot practice democracy in the wider national political context. The political parties need to be really conscious about it if we want to make it a democratic country worth the name.

It's really a dangerous practice to leave the final decision making authority to the party chief(s). This happens only in dictatorial regimes as there are always innumerable stooges to support a dictator. In fact, no party chief should take the burden of taking country's or even party's major decisions upon himself/herself. It's too dangerous as individuals are more likely to make wrong decisions. All important decisions should be taken on democratic basis involving majority members.

The horrible and universally condemnable grenade attack on the Opposition leaders that killed a dedicated political personality and many others created further chaos in the already volatile situation. Instead of allowing appropriate investigation in the matter, the political parties -- one in power and the other in opposition -- blamed each other for the attack thus confusing the people engaged in the investigation. Normally such investigation should have been ordered in consultation with the affected party i.e. the Opposition, but unfortunately nothing of the sort happened and hence this created further dissatisfaction among the Opposition parties. This also gave them more ammunition and further opportunities to reiterate their previous demand for the government's resignation. The government also took the stand that the Opposition was not interested in the investigation; it had the political motive behind i.e. the resignation of the government. The reply from the ruling party was obvious, it said it would not resign even a day before its term expires. Thus the country's politics is in total turmoil.

Then the flood and thereafter the torrential rain that partly destroyed the crop and much of the seasonal vegetables. This would have raised the prices somewhat due to reduced supplies, but the situation has been made unbearable by the gangs involved in collecting unauthorised tolls at several transit points and unscrupulous traders hoarding stocks. Here comes the government's role in terms of dealing with such rouges. But the whole thing goes back to the same old story -- 'lack of effective of governance' in practical and real terms. The so-called unholy links of Mastans and those rouge elements with some important political parties make the task of the law enforcing agencies extremely difficult.

Now the political parties have to take the full responsibilities for such a miserable and sickening situation as they are the ones who come by turn to govern the country. No one party so far involved in the country's governance can say that they are not to blame. The people of Bangladesh have seen them since Liberation. So it's time for them to rectify and salvage the country's good name. We were certainly not like this before, but why are we so now? Who are responsible -- the successive governments? Time has come to perhaps privatise the government itself. Elections should take place only to elect the law makers who will sit in the Parliament and frame laws; they should not be involved in running the business of the government. The idea may sound funny, but the time has come to go for such unprecedented steps.

I for one still have faith in our people. The leaders of country's political parties were not like this before. Some probably are beyond any correction as they are always afraid of losing their present or potential political positions but the great majority of our leaders are still capable of working honestly to bring back the country's good image. Enough is enough. Please for God's sake, change your plans and programmes and tactics to gain the right to govern. Once a party is in power, it must not forget that it has to go back to the people once its term expires.

So far as the Opposition is concerned, it should also recall its previous performances while it was in power. Public memory is short but it's not that short. Therefore, instead of spending energy on a practically unachievable programme to topple the present government which would last practically for about another year and a half, better course for the Opposition would be to concentrate on what it (they) can offer to the people and how these would be better than what the present government has been offering. Just see what John Kerry is offering to the Americans against Bush's programme; it's a big debate on all issues that concern the Americans. Though election fraud cannot be ruled out (ref. last American election and Florida voting mess), which Americans are already worried about, but the very campaigns are praiseworthy as these are bringing out almost everything to the forefront so that the people know the leaders and their capabilities and above all their programmes for the people.

Why another election when successive Oppositions boycotted the parliament thus completely ignoring the right of the people of Bangladesh to have their cases presented to the parliament by their elected members? What benefit the people get when the elected members boycott the parliament but continue to draw the pay and allowances as members? Yes, the Opposition members are often not allowed enough time to speak and or even their request for debates on important national issues are, at times, rejected, but these would have to be sorted out and projected within the parliament whenever the chance comes. Boycott and consequent hartals do not affect the ruling party; these seriously affect the people. In any case, people do note the undemocratic behaviour of the ruling party whenever it behaves that way and this would go against the ruling party when it goes for fresh mandate. This is how the democratic process should work.

What is the guarantee that the next losing party will not resort to same tactics -- boycott of parliament, hartals, mastanism leading to terrorism etc? This time the people will ask for firm and solemn commitment of the election seekers that they will not deceive the people any more by boycotting the parliament and resorting to hartals.

Two years will be necessary to make preparations of their plans and programmes and placing them effectively to the people. The people would expect the political parties to work hard and go for serious debates on various issues that are important for the people and the nation.

Though ours is a parliamentary democracy, we may ask the party chiefs to go for open debates on major issues including economic ones confronting the country. There should be subject based pin pointed debates as done in the United States. This will help people to know the quality of the leaders of the major parties and their knowledge about the issues they are supposed to handle.

The duration of five years for a party(s) to run the country is too much. It is necessary now under the present situation to bring it to four years. This will reduce the tension among the losing parties and the call for midterm election may be less frequent.

Muslehuddin Ahmad, a former Secretary and Ambassador, is Chairman of Civic Watch-Bangladesh.