Font size: 
Excluding a number of years between 1975 and 1990, Bangladesh has been known as a democratic country, which has had three successive elected Parliaments in the last 15 years. Consequently, many concerned people have asked what disaster caused the state of emergency in the country. There was no external aggression or natural disaster that took place before the proclamation of the state of emergency this time.
In one sentence, the answer is demoralization of the nation at the hands of the country's top politicians as well as political practices since independence that have intensified, producing zero honesty and commitment to the country. As a result, the whole nation has suffered from the state of emergency as people have lost their fundamental rights -- freedom of expression, assembly, the press, etc. -- even indoor political discussions have been banned by the interim government.
Looking at Bangladesh's political practices after independence, one easily sees that politicians have grabbed public and private properties under protection of the power of the government. After the war of liberation, a group of politicians initiated a competition to become rich within a matter of weeks. As the military generals grabbed governmental power in the 1970s and 1980s, some politicians sold their allegiance to the soldiers in order to acquire power.
In this process, politicians attained the leading positions in the government, and the military supported them. They both corruptly enriched themselves at the expense of Bangladesh's people. Consequently, these politicians contributed a great deal, in a negative sense, to alter the political situation in the country. For example, they occupied seats in several rubberstamp Parliaments that were formed through farcical elections.
The people of Bangladesh built up a culture of protest against tyranny suffered during the colonial era. This culture returned as a major force to oust a military autocrat in the late 1980s. In spite of this resistance by the people over the years, Bangladesh still suffers from politicians who seek to serve themselves rather than the country. There are some politicians, for instance, who remain in their seats of power regardless of which political party takes over the government.
Moreover, the major political parties in Bangladesh are accustomed to starting demonstrations against the winning party the day after election results are declared, alleging some form of "rigging" of the vote and a "media coup" or an "administrative coup" through the elections. In one post-election scenario, opposition parties take to the streets, along with their desperate activists, instead of joining sessions of Parliament.
If the party in power wins an election, its members are overwhelmed with joy, not because they have won the trust of the people and the responsibility to improve the lives of the people of a developing nation, but because they have gained a "license" to make money through various forms of corruption. Frequently witnessed corrupt practices include taking bribes for recruiting and appointing public servants; taking control of the government's purchases, sales and public construction work; human trafficking and facilitating workers' employment opportunities abroad; and smuggling. The ruling party leaders meanwhile become celebrities for gaining all these opportunities to enjoy power -- and corruption -- while the opposition is disappointed at missing out on these perks of office.
Interestingly, the people's name is used by both groups. The winning party says, "We have the people's mandate to rule the country for five years." At the same time, the losers say: "You have hijacked our victory. We have the real mandate of the people. We are ready to oust you from power."
The application of government power -- through the police and other law enforcement agencies as well as various related institutions -- becomes the method of the ruling party to suppress the opposition. They apply maximum strength to misuse the civil administration so they can maintain power in the next election.
Meanwhile, the opposition becomes more violent day by day, showing its strength on the streets, destroying public and private property -- vehicles, offices, railway stations, seaports, airports, homes and office and business institutions belonging to their counterparts. The whole country enters a chaotic period for weeks through these self-centered politics. The hardworking common people are thrown into the guillotine of continuous strikes and lawless actions in the name of the "legal and political right" to express one's views -- through the destruction of people's property and livelihoods.
This culture of looting, beating, resisting and displaying muscle power has been part of the politics of Bangladesh for decades, generating distrust between members of the country's two major political parties -- the Bangladesh National Party and the Awami League. This animosity results in dozens of violent deaths between the two parties and, in the end, a state of emergency where the people are left with no fundamental rights, no human rights, no political rights.
All wrongs thus become "right" as a result of exploiting people's rights rather than eliminating the wrongs. If political practices in Bangladesh had been the opposite, what would have happened to the nation?
--
(Rater Zonaki is the pseudonym of a human rights activist who has been working on human rights issues in Bangladesh for more than a decade. He worked as a journalist in the country in the 1990s.)
