The question that should bother us is that after taking away the functions of overseeing the general election from the politicians through constitutional amendments why the civil society has to assume core political and electoral responsibilities like campaigning and assisting to choose honest and upright candidates? What can really be achieved by this extended mistrust?

The pre-eminence of citizens
Many in Bangladesh are of the considered view that the time has come when citizens must wrest the initiative from professional politicians and from political parties and insist upon men and women of knowledge, vision and character being chosen as candidates for parliamentary election. It is believed that by voting ignorant professional politicians to power, we have kept a singularly gifted and enterprising nation in the ranks of the poorest on earth. We have unfortunately reached this stage because our politicians have a vested interest in illiteracy. Their survival as public figures depends upon the continuation of the forces of ignorance. It appears cynical that for hefty politicians, goodly in girth, poverty is good business. They talk continually about poverty without having the will, the expertise or the imagination to eradicate it. The noble processes of our constitution have been trivialised by the power-holders, the power-seekers and the power-brokers in our capital city. Elections have been reduced to a horse race by the contesting politicians. Indeed our country has been reduced to a cesspool of degradation by professional politicians.

The apathy of citizens is dangerous in a democracy because a bad government is the inevitable consequence of an indifferent electorate. Therefore, to ensure cleaner politics and bright economic future, our citizens have to be willing to give of themselves. For that to happen, there has to be a deep-felt need for an intelligent and adequate organisation of voters. So, the civil society's thoughts on some outfit like a citizen's council in every constituency, consisting of impartial, non-party individuals who would appraise the candidates and recommend the right candidates to the voters and after the elections ensure that the candidate does not disgrace himself and his constituents, appear conceptually salutary. The voter's consciousness to be roused to unmistakably insist upon the right type of candidates, instead of allowing the political parties to palm off ignorant on them is the crucial factor. If this succeeds partially, then our young republic would have a new lease of life because well-equipped minds with the ability to have a bright career outside politics may then take to public life as a matter of national service.

The party system, institutions and the quest for honest election
The political party system in a democracy takes grievous toll of a member's independence, individual judgment and freedom of action. But the system does bring about coherence and unity of purpose in the actual working of democracy. One may, however, say that the duty of the citizen is not merely to vote but to vote wisely. He must be guided by reason alone and irrespective of the party label. The right man in the wrong party shall be preferable to the wrong man in the right party, according to this thinking.

Is our civil society trying to initiate a non-party organisation which will restore the sense of values and the love of basic human freedoms which inspired the framing of our lofty constitution? There is perhaps a feeling that the voice of a small minority is presently mistaken to be the voice of majority, simply because it is loud and vociferous while the gentle voice of reason is not heard. The apprehension is that as long as thinking men and women will not take the trouble to give public expression to their views, the nation should be ungrudgingly ready to live at the mercy of brats and fools.

The question is, how do we clean the political environment and educate our masters, that is, the people who are the deciding factor in a democracy based on adult suffrage? Our civil society, presumably, aims at disseminating correct facts and right ideas among the public at large. This is essential because the accumulated dirt of our politics and election process cannot be wiped out in one single stroke. The reality is that the politicians themselves have allowed corruption to flourish and encouraged the use and misuse of civil and military administration for serving individual and party interests. There is, therefore, no guarantee that we will succeed to achieve a desirable government by only fielding fit candidates without first cleaning the system including the election process. More specifically, within the present dispensation, how will the honest and competent candidate remain competent? So what is the objective of the apparently unilateral and isolated movemen0t to field competent candidates without clear stance on the systemic deficiencies and hindrances?

There is, however, no denying that elections held under the existing politico-administrative realities will be fraught with grave dangers and that a change entailing a clean election process is necessary to wriggle out of the quagmire and in this background there is a need for competent candidates. But the big question is that electioneering is a constitutional and political process. Would it be possible to venture out of this process altogether and still retain the hope to clean it? Stated otherwise, would it be feasible and practical?

The civil society would perhaps have done well to dwell on those immediately imperative corrective measures regarding the election process and how much is achievable before the next general election. They could have done some self-criticism and soul-searching by pointed mention of the silence, inactivity and evasive postures of the intelligentsia in so far as it relates to the remedial steps for cleaning the process of electioneering. Extra cautiousness and silence coupled with fence-sitting by thinking persons have pampered politicians and emboldened them to be indecently indiscreet. We may do will to remember that state institutions were used by men in uniform to create political party and shadowing political opposition. Politics and politicians were vilified by state propaganda. There was a time when intellectuals leading the civil society did not protest the adulteration and the decay of institutions in the desired manner. In fact, the present situation is a legacy of the abnormalities and incongruities witnessed on the political scene in late 70s and 80s.

We need to emphasise on the corrective actions to be taken with regard to preparation of voters list, the manning of election commission, the de-politicisation of civil bureaucracy, stoppage of partisan recruitments and promotion/postings in our concerted efforts to create the right election atmosphere. If situation remains unaltered then competent candidates can still be fielded as proposed but the victors at the polls would be the mafias and the godfathers. In such an eventuality, it would only by proper for the civil society to help facilitate the creation of a honest election environment prior to fielding competent candidates.

If we want to take a long hard look beyond the immediate problems besetting the polity then we must appreciate that a meaningful democracy -- the objective of honest election -- is almost impossible if politicians can continue to have a vested interest in illiteracy and public ignorance. When a republic comes to birth, it is the leaders who produce the institutions and later it is the institutions which produce the leaders. Hope lies in education by which right conduct, fear of God and love will be developed among the citizens from the childhood.

There is no doubt that our history will apportion the blame and responsibility among a wide spectrum of the elected representatives who have betrayed their trust. However, at this moment when we are standing on the escalator of mismanagement and corruption, right-minded citizens cannot afford to stand frozen in disgust and dismay. We cannot merely look upon the political development in sorrow and upon our politicians in anger. Honest and knowledgeable persons must devote themselves to the task of educating public opinion and the younger among them should stand for election in large numbers. Somerset Maugham said "It is a funny thing about life that if you refuse to accept anything but the best, you often get it". This is equally true of democracy. If people refuse to accept any but the best citizens as candidates, it would usher in the golden age of our republic. Democracy gives, as life gives what we ask of it.

Muhammad Nurul Huda is a Former Secretary and IGP