Perceptions about any issue, formed by hearsay, can lead to drastic social and political outcomes, just as in economics misinformation about future economic outlooks such as inflation and business confidence can cause a stock market crash and economic downturn.

Partisanship is characterised as an inclination to favour one group, or view, or opinion, over alternatives. A partisan is an adherent or supporter of a person, group, party, or cause, to promote personal agenda. Partisanship can be -- and often is -- driven by emotional allegiance.

Patronisation in its positive nuance is an act of promoting, supporting or sponsoring an individual, a party or an institution.

The reason for presenting these definitions is to make the correct nexus between misperception about the operations of the caretaker government (CTG) and some of its recent actions that may appear to favour some political parties or corrupt individuals to the exclusion of others.

Communication Adviser MA Matin's comment that "Jamaat may not have committed as much corruption" has caused quite a stir for the last few days. I saw him say so on TV, and I assumed that this unguarded comment was simply rhetorical, rather than being indicative of support or sympathy for Jamaat.

One must realise that there were only 17 Jamaat MP's in the last parliament, and nearly 50% of them are either already in jail or under investigation. However, such comments by a person of authority aren't atypical when he/she is loaded down with multifarious jobs on any given day, along with being prodded by reporters who are looking for sensational remarks.

Ever since Bangladesh was liberated, the politicians-cum-bandits have been plunging themselves into an extravaganza of greed and thievery, disregarding the possibility that the people may one day seek restitution -- and that they (politicians) would get their payback in shame and shackles. The bandits of the last alliance regime firmly believed that the politicised network they had implanted in every branch of the government would ensure their return to power, and protect their looted wealth.

Be they misanthropists or pragmatists, the growing perception among many people is that some of these bandits may sidestep punishment by convincing the CTG that they were the good guys surrounded by bad company. They're now reinventing themselves as reformers, driven by the fear of being imprisoned for their crimes, the desire to protect their looted wealth, and the prospect of returning to the exalted position of power to loot again.

The overwhelming perception at home and abroad, even among the partisan BNP leaders and activists, is that the scale of Khaleda's operations -- corruption and extortion, along with her party's bald patronisation of criminal wrongdoers -- is such that Hasina's indiscretions, by comparison, seem like little more than childish pranks.

The CTG must quell the growing perception that some power, not necessarily divine, is protecting Khaleda and her family members, including her brother Syeed Iskander who's roaming freely outside Bangladesh. The perception is that "justice delayed -- justice denied."

Baseless or well-founded, another damaging perception gaining momentum is that some powerful clique wants to demolish Bangabandhu's surviving children and split Awami League into fractious groups, while promoting the reformists faction of BNP led by Mannan Bhuiyan -- former minister of LGRD, Transparency International's 2005 top ranked corrupt ministry.

The game plan, as some perception goes, is to let Khaleda and Bhuiyan fight it out and split BNP, and once the dust settles down they will have their ride in the prison van. On the other hand, Hasina is too strong to be confronted by the reformists, who cannot dent the party unity, so let the legal process cripple her political destiny.

In his July 25 piece in Janakantha, Abdul Gaffar Chowdhury argued that the 1/11 promulgation of the state of emergency was a gambit, not to save the country but to protect the BNP-Jamaat alliance government against the secular, liberal forces of the 14-party alliance. This is tantamount to an accusation of partisanship and patronisation to BNP -- one that I cannot subscribe to, at least not yet.

Actual or perceived, partisanship is damaging to any governmental authority because it can undermine its legitimacy. Legitimacy in this context is the trust the citizens have that members of the government will apply the rule of law effectively and equally to all -- guided by the saying that "no one is above the law." A government's legitimacy erodes when the citizens, rightly or wrongly, become skeptical about its authority and feel that it is diverging from its promises of fairness and fair play.

We all clap when we hear sounds such as "no one is above the law." But people are becoming impatient; they expect -- and have a right to expect -- that their government will regard these words as something more than mere rhetorical catchphrases.

For example, to many citizens the fact that nearly 500 or so joint forces were sent to arrest Sheikh Hasina for a nearly decade old alleged extortion episode is not evidence that the CTG is adhering to "no one is above the law." By contrast, the incident spawned a perception that her apprehension was little more than cynical ploy to exclude her from the political process.

In his July 29 piece, sociologist Habibul Khondker wrote: "When Awami League leaders, such as Dr. Mohiuddin Alamgir, were thrown behind bars, some thought of it as collateral damage that the Awami League has to take in the greater interest of fighting corruption and housecleaning. However, putting Hasina behind bars is more than collateral damage, it changes the entire game."

This reflection isn't merely a bit of idle musing; it's a resounding indictment of the ambit and specifics surrounding the intentions and operations of a CTG -- one that was gleefully welcomed by the people, including the now imprisoned AL Chief Sheikh Hasina. Shouldn't the CTG act to dismiss all such perceptions with unblemished transparency of its actions?

Those who read my February 12 article, "The magnificent eleven," will certainly remember my effusive enthusiasm about the eleven advisers to the caretaker government, and their reform initiatives. I'm still a fervent supporter of this government.

Although I share some of the views and skepticism of Gaffar Chowdhury and other popular columnists, I still haven't lost hope for delivery of some good from this government. But when I am convinced that all these columnists' perceptions are true reflections of the realities in the making, I will have nothing to clap for and no one to write against -- my column will tiptoe into oblivion without prior notice.

Dr. Abdullah A. Dewan is Professor of Economics at Eastern Michigan University.