Font size: 
This process does not look too promising, however. There has been no successful political dialogue between the ruling and the opposition parties since the 1990s, and the Bangladeshis have paid a high price for this failure. Political deadlocks have severely damaged the process of democratization and its institutionalization.
The ruling and the opposition parities led by Khaleda Zia and Shiekh Hasina seemed proud of the fact that they did not even greet each other when both participated in national programs as a formality, not by choice. They would never hold any dialogue to strengthen their political or interpersonal relationships, either in the Parliament or outside. The two top politicians faced regular criticism over their deepening hatred of each other, which ultimately multiplied socioeconomic and political problems.
The current state of emergency in Bangladesh is also a product of the personal and political hatred of these two political giants. Many critics blame the country's current problems on the politicians' failure to improve interpersonal relationships within and between their parties.
The Election Commission -- which claims to be independent from the Office of the Prime Minister under the military-backed government -- has implied that its purpose in holding dialogue with the political parties is to reform the election process, but it has not been successful. Rather, it has been accused of creating factions within the parties in the name of holding "dialogue."
The government has now introduced its own "dialogue" approach with the political parties. A university teacher and government adviser, Hossain Zillur Rahman, sent a text message on April 12 to the acting president of the Awami League, Zillur Rahman, inviting him to a "pre-dialogue" meeting on the following afternoon.
After the meeting on April 13, the eve of the Bangladesh New Year, both the government and political leaders briefed the media separately. The Awami League leaders said they had demanded the immediate release of their party chief, Sheikh Hasina, to allow her to lead the formal dialogue with the chief adviser of the government. They also demanded the release of other detained senior leaders, along with other requests such as lifting the state of emergency, curbing price hikes, announcing the date of a general election and ensuring the independence of the judiciary.
On the other hand, the government advisers who attended the same meeting said they were "optimistic" that they would come to a "consensus" and "agreement" to hold an effective and acceptable election. They emphasized the need to improve the quality of the political process, culture and system. In response to a journalist's question regarding the demand to release the heads of the two major parties, Khaleda and Hasina, an adviser replied, "The conditions are not hurdles; they are being resolved in the pre-dialogue meeting…we all will have to come to an agreement."
After two pre-dialogue meetings with the Awami League, the government sat down for a similar discussion with representatives of a faction of the Bangladesh National Party on Tuesday. The government has adopted a policy of holding such discussions with most of the political parties by turns in the coming days. This policy has raised questions among the people.
Curiosity is high over what kind of "agreement" will be reached, as these dialogues are being held behind closed doors. There are already reports that the government is working to create a safe exit strategy for its own members through the dialogues -- to make sure that the policymakers of the military-backed government will escape the kind of treatment they handed out to politicians, such as detaining them in prison -- when they hand over governmental power. They want to ensure they will not be held responsible for their misdeeds by the next government.
The military-backed government's fear of such consequences has been growing as it has failed to address public needs over the last16 months. The dialogue approach is to make all the political parties understand that if any of them is elected to form a government, it should leave the military-backed government officials alone; none should be jailed in the future. It seems quite evident that the government's agenda is not "reform," but self-preservation.
There is a possibility that the political parties may go along with the government in that they will allow the caretaker government's officials to walk free in exchange for amnesty for the currently detained political leaders, beyond any fair trial over outstanding allegations of corruption.
In that case, crimes against thousands of people will go unpunished, as will the violation of the constitutional mandate to hold a general election within the deadline and the extension of the caretaker government's tenure beyond any provision in the supreme law of the land. The upcoming general election will be a mere formality through which the politicians and current rulers rehabilitate each other through "mutual trust and agreement."
The nation will suffer from the damage to democracy and disrespect to the Constitution from this lawless approach. The screams of the victims will remain unheard; their pains will go uncured and ignored. Will Bangladesh once again take the road of granting impunity to the perpetrators for the benefit of a group of politicians?
--
(Rater Zonaki is the pseudonym of a human rights defender based in Hong Kong working at the Asian Human Rights Commission. He is a Bangladeshi national with a degree in literature from a university in Dhaka. He began his career as a journalist in 1990 and engaged in human rights activism at the grassroots level in his country for more than a decade. He also worked as an editor for publications on human rights and socio-cultural issues and contributed to other similar publications.)
