This resulted in the war of independence, and the emergence of Bangladesh as an independent state in 1971. Awami League was forced out of power in 1975 through a civil-military coup. General Ziaur Rahman became president in 1977. Zia's assassination in 1981 created a sort of vacuum, and General Ershad captured power through a bloodless coup in 1982. After around nine years Ershad had to step down in the face of joint movement by AL and BNP in 1990.

After the restoration of democracy we have had three democratic regimes, one ruled by BNP, one by AL and one by BNP-led 4-party alliance. Unfortunately, the parties (BNP and AL) that together restored democracy are now fighting each other to destroy the democratic order in the country because of their mutual suspicion, greed for power and difference in political ideology. However, it is doubtful as to how far these parties really care for the people despite the fact that the founder of AL, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, struggled throughout his life for the economic and political emancipation of the people of the country.

On the other hand, Zia not only fought directly against the Pakistani forces but also, apparently, promoted the right of the people to freedom of thought and expression. It is indeed sad that both these leaders were assassinated. Now we are struggling to save our hard earned democracy because of lack of confidence among the major political parties.

It is interesting that lack of mutual trust resulted in the addition of a provision for a non-party caretaker government. The main task of this government is to hold a free, fair and neutral election. Due to non-cooperation by AL the then government of BNP had to pass the bill for establishing a caretaker government without much scrutiny or deliberation. This resulted in the existence of some flaws, which are creating various hurdles in running parliamentary democracy smoothly.

If the mutual suspicion could be done away with there would not be any necessity for a caretaker government. At the moment, what is needed is reformation of the election commission by strengthening it and making it completely free from the executive.

Whatever failures or successes we have seen of the past caretaker governments, this is for the first time that we are faced with a situation in which a partisan president has become the chief of the caretaker government through, reportedly, adopting dubious means. Needless to say that it is extremely difficult for a pro-BNP president to act as a non-party, neutral chief of CTG. In fact the president-cum-chief of caretaker government has not taken any decision that is not liked or supported by the BNP.

His dilly-dallying, and the vacillating decisions in regard to some administrative matters, like sending an adviser to the CEC, indicate his incapacity for performing his responsibilities. So far people have not seen any bold decision from him. He cannot satisfy everyone. He must find the way for ensuring a free, fair and credible election in which at least all the major parties will participate. No doubt, the concerned advisers are working extremely hard to solve the problems created by an "arrogant, incompetent and biased" CEC. We have, however, not seen similar enthusiasm in the chief adviser.

We do not understand why he is holding so many portfolios when he is so old (76 yrs). It is reported that more than two thousand files of the ministries under his charge are pending. If he does not find enough time to spare for disposal of these cases he may ask for assistance from advisers like Akbar Ali Khan, Shafi Sami, Hasan Mashhud Chowdhury and others. He must trust his advisers. He must not try to perform beyond his capability.

The following factors may be identified as the causes for failure of a chief adviser:

• An individual loyal to one party cannot act as an absolutely neutral person;
• A very old person cannot perform the arduous task of the chief adviser of CTG under tremendous stress and strain;
• Not having much trust in the advisers;
• Not realizing the consequences of his failure to finish the task.

The EC still claims that a fair, free and credible election is possible with a faulty voters' list, which includes about 13 million fake voters and excludes a very large number of genuine voters.

The feeble steps of the chief adviser of CTG cannot assure us of a free, fair and credible election, unless the 4-party alliance agrees to contest on a level field, for the sake of saving democracy, and avoiding a possible civil war. They should realise that even a free and fair election cannot be credible as long as the voter list is not corrected, the fake voters names deleted, and left out voters names included. In fact, cooperation of the 4-party alliance in preparing a credible voters' list will enhance their position among members of opposition camp, and will be highly appreciated by the common people.

A B M S Zahur is a former Joint Secretary.