The New Nation - Internet Edition

Mining coal for energy security

BRICK manufacturing and steel re-rolling mills, the major consumers of coal, reportedly use around 7 million tonnes of the mineral annually. Bangladesh meets this demand with coal imported from different countries, mainly India. But the sulphur content of imported coal is more than 1 percent, which exceeds the official permissible level. In view of this importers tried to bring coal from Australia and Indonesia in 1995. But the traditional coal exporters offered a significant price cut to local importers. Since then, none attempted to import coal from any other source.

Even superior quality coal more of less pollutes the environment. Burning of sub-standard coal generates excessive sulphur dioxide which, mixing with clouds, causes acid rain with extremely harmful impacts on air, soil, plants and animals. In the absence of alternative sources of superior quality coal, restriction on the use of sub-standard coal did not work in the past. Bangladesh is thus compelled to suspend restrictions. According to experts, Bangladeshi coal is of superior quality and contains less sulphur. There is the potential to meet internal demands from domestic reserve.

But, it is alleged, the policy makers are not giving adequate emphasis on acceleration of coal mining. The adoption of a new coal policy is advancing at a snail's pace. To conserve the environment from pollution by restricting the use of sulphur-rich coal, mining of local coal has become urgent. The use of local coal will not only help keep pollution at a low level but also save hard-earned foreign currency. The use of this natural resource has become urgent also on another score. The present recoverable reserve of natural gas may last only another four years. Otherwise, if the gas resource depletes Bangladesh would face energy crisis of insurmountable proportions.

Defaulters in the public sector

GOVERNMENT organisations that do not settle their accounts with other public bodies or private organisations have been standing in the way of better functioning of the public sector as a whole. The defaulter public organisations sometimes face formidable difficulties in clearing their debts. But the difficulties, in many cases, are of their own making; These bodies, cannot, therefore, expect a sympathetic attitude towards their default status. Usually, defaulters in the private sector are scorned in the media and hard demands are made on them to make them perform their non-performing loans.

But the opposite is the case in respect of the public sector where many public sector organisations with even adequate resources deliberately withhold payment of their dues to other public sector bodies pushing the latter into serious financial and consequently other problems. The utility organisations like the Dhaka Electricity Supply Authority (DESA) and Water Supply and Sewerage Authority (WASA) have huge claims against their public and private sector clients. The non-payment of their dues by these defaulting clients has been creating enormous troubles for the organisations in balancing their budgets or taking up routine development and maintenance works.

The utility bodies are seen proactive nowadays in collecting their dues from private clients. But there seems to be no such enthusiasm in doing the same in relation to their customers in the public sector. But the utility service organisations can much improve the state of their financial health and operational efficiency by going for the bill defaulters in the public sector. There is a very pressing need for all public sector organisations to become conscious in varying degrees and take realistic measures with reasonable hope of success to get their dues settled by the defaulting public sector organisations.

Co-parliamentary body, not national government

Md. Monirul Islam

Since its inception to present, Bangladesh more briskly faces its challenges to take necessary plans or steps for its greater development concerning political, economic, societal and over all cultural panorama. Protagonists of various ages stride out composing state ingredients into mounting figure. They dreamt such a thing never be pursued either their lacking of articulating objects or of enthusiasm in the mechanization of seeking interest of definite fields of orientation.

So, the conditions as claustrophobia has remained persist in Bangladeshi affair and it didn't come at the sight as an ancillary outline for country's convenient. Some analysts ascribe it the leadership crisis where leaders, in most cases, seek their individual interests through smashing their core value of leadership. Aristotle's experience of elucidation is more okay in figuring out the trends of our leaders from the birth to present of Bangladesh as an independent country in the world. He said, 'The sense of the value of "ruling and being ruled in turn" is derived from the experience that the ruler may use his power to subordinate the lives of the citizens of the state not to the common good but to his own private purposes.'

In this journey of state-leadership, they constituted the constitution of country and they were confronted with grave dilemmas in laying down the ideology-secularism, liberalism and so on so. Those dilemmas were not sited overtly but covertly and further configuration of the change in the constitution came through its various amendments. The introducing of Bismillahir-Rahmanir-Rahim in the preamble to the constitution, believe in the sovereignty of Allah, Islam's precedence as state- religion etc.

Since the end of drafting constitution of the country, the reactionary approach in the tenure of various governments in terms of rectifying constitution were located with the process of another amendment. Fourth amendment of the constitution added one party system and presidential form of government in the provision of our constitution and this amendment of constitution was amended again with introducing the twelve amendment of the constitution where it set up multi-party system and parliamentary form of government.

It is the historical trends of our leaders that they were not only limited to amend the constitution but to amend the amendment of the constitution and it has been located in above mentioned proof. This reactionary approach in the constitutional history of Bangladesh vehemently shows the positive development of the state. Even the autocratic ruler in the history of Bangladesh made his good image in taking Islam, the state-religion through introducing the eighth amendment of the constitution; that's an exceptional case.

The process of rectifying constitution is the common history of developing and developed countries in the world. But the absolute amendment of the amendment of constitution is rarely located in world scenario but this process of amending the amendment of constitution occurs in its smootish shape in developed countries. Politics of developed states is reactionary but flexible. For instance, when President Bush decided to invade Iraq in 2003, a bill was taken in the parliament for discussion. The opponents were reactionary but flexible in a way that, even several parliamentarians of conservative party (opposition to Bush) exposed themselves in their speech, if the process of the restoration of democratic standard and security of mankind from nuclear weapons belongs to Iraq functions in the world, this invasion might be espoused and if the preservation of country's (U.S) interest is kept up.

The tendencies of the counter act only for countering, but not for constructiveness has been the routine work of our all existing political parties and their leaders. When the Awami League government signed the treaty with the tribal people on December 2, 1997, we observed a great protest of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) against AL government. BNP opposed this treaty with tribe, most likely, in fear of demanding of 'separate tribal state in Chittagong Hill Tract' by the tribal people for the prospect although this treaty, in a sense, has declined the conflict fiercely occurred between the army and tribe rebellions in CHT.

Thus, we watched this conflicting gauge among all the existing parties in Bangladesh. All showed their arrogance in commanding country likewise absolutism. But this absolutism never suits with that of democratic standard and it always resides against people's interest. Aristotle always holds that 'absolute government is not properly political, that government is not like the rule of a shepherd over his sheep, but the rule of equals over equals. He admits that the democrats are right in insisting that equality is a necessary element in the state, though he thinks they do not admit the importance of other equally necessary elements.'

So, all political governments in Bangladesh foiled to practice the democratic norms and values in serving mass people but moneyed people (equals over equals). The vehement corruptions by the bigwigs in the country is the outcome of practicing the mean-'equals over equals' which always erects gigantic base of big classes but generates discrimination between upper classes and lower classes (general masses) in any affair. Equity or equality is to be stressed on doling out the rights and dues for general masses.

In the context of upcoming election of 2008, a symphony of forming national government is being paid its attention to the scholar fields. Some scholars espouse and others oppose in framing this national government. Those who are opposing this national government, I would like to symphonize my wise-crack with them and the opposite scholars are opposing but not mentioning substitute of it. So, I want to suggest, as a solution, constituting a Co-parliamentary body instead of National Government.

If the national government is formed, the one of the most democratic practice-'election' might lose its adaptability that will cause absence of popular participation in policy making procedure as a consequence. Since popular participation is the focal memo in practicing democratic standard, so the absence of people in drafting National Government is intolerable. It's a scholarly argument that 'in modern terms, it is a simple, rough-and-ready attempt to solve that constant problem of politics, how efficient government is to be combined with popular control.' So, popular participation is mandatory.

The co-parliamentary body, to me, might be consisted of the combination of civil society workers, veteran party leaders, businessmen, retired civil servants, retired army personnel, religious leaders. After the national election, the government would be formed as the process in Bangladeshi affair is continued. Then, the honorable President of People's Republic of Bangladesh will call a meeting with the participation of all the members of Parliament. In this meeting, the Co-parliamentary body would be formed with the proposal given by these members of parliament. The members of Co-parliamentary body would be not more than ten likewise the present caretaker government.

After ending the meeting, the president will declare the name of ten members based on the proposals given by members of parliament. President will promulgate the body with the keen the consideration or combination. Actually, president of country will also be the chairman/president of this co-parliamentary body. This body might also be called as 'shadow ministry'. All types of meeting/functions would be held/ accomplished under the presidency of the president of People's Republic of Bangladesh.

The functions of Co-parliamentary body/shadow ministry are to discuss about the facts which would be passed in the parliamentary session by the members of parliaments in the parliament. With the fruitful discussion of Co-parliamentary body, the members of this body under the presidency of the President of People's Republic of Bangladesh shall find out one or two options of a bill prior to the discussion of members of parliament in the parliament. On the basis of these (one or two) options, it would be taken to discuss by members of parliaments and after ending the discussion, fruitful one of them would be selected as a bill and lastly it would be passed in the parliament.

The pioneer of 'Ideal State', Greek philosopher Plato, in forming his Ideal State, 'Plato gave those who have complete knowledge of the good must be few, and therefore Plato gave entire power in his state into the hands of the small minority of philosopher guardians'. If the concept of Co-parliamentary body/Shadow Ministry is implicated in Bangladeshi aspect, his notion of ideal state by small majority of philosopher guardians is to be considered.

Why it is necessary, Plato answered it- 'the principle of "tools to those who can use them" ought to lead him, as it does Aristotle'. Our political leaders in the history of Bangladesh failed to utilize their tools in accordance with the needs of country. Using these state apparatus with charismatic or skillful approach, this co-parliamentary body is mandatory for Bangladesh.

If this process of drafting co-parliamentary body is continued in Bangladeshi arena, the tension or fear of the advisors of present Caretaker Government of falling into trap by the next political government will become paler and some scholars' demand of the Presidential form of Government would be fulfilled diminutively because of having the Chairmanship of the President of People's Republic of Bangladesh in the shadow ministry. And President's position as nominal/titular head in the parliamentary form of Government in Bangladesh would be reduced in a sense.

Earlier (since the birth of Bangladesh) amendment of our constitution didn't bestow the nation an atmosphere of peace but snatched the freedom of expression of men although it is said that situational needs urged the state authority to adopt that rectification of the constitution. Now, it has the possibility to amend the constitution by the next elected government for the expression of their reactionary mind-set. Co-parliamentary shall be well-enough also of what is to be done in this context. 'Violating constitution that happened and amendment of constitution again and again' never grant the bright prospect of any country. So, it is to be taken in mind of well-wishers of country.

Last of all, I would like to conclude my attempt to let the authority of Bangladesh to realize that election is the principal tool in regarding democratic norms and values. If the National government is formed, the principle tool of democratic process (election) will lose its validity in Bangladesh and to this extent, it would not be recognized not only by our people but by foreigners also. Then, the state will fall into another emergency.

A divine guidance that was highly equipped with that of the annunciation of Greek philosopher Plato that 'Virtue is Knowledge and Knowledge is Virtue'. One links others. Now it is very necessary in Bangladeshi politics to combine the two ingredients-'virtue and knowledge' to keep the democratic or peaceful atmospheres continue in the Bangladesh. This Co-parliamentary Body or Shadow Ministry may play role in achieving the prescribed goal for the bright future of Bangladesh.

Malaysia elections: Between change and inertia

Farish Noor

AND so, with the dissolution of the Malaysian parliament on Wednesday, Malaysia is heading to the elections once again. Scheduled for March 8, it is clear that this will be one of the more hotly contested elections that Malaysia has witnessed.

Over the past two years alone a string of controversies have stirred the Malaysian public's interest in the goings-on in the corridors of power in the country: The highly publicised case of the murder of a Mongolian model has dragged many a famous name (including that of politicians) into the limelight; the revelation of irregularities in the appointment of senior judges has brought the judiciary into close focus; the destruction of a number of Hindu temples has aroused the anger of many Malaysian Hindus; while the plethora of on-going marriage and divorce cases between Muslims and non-Muslims has added to the widening of the gulf between the religious and ethnic communities in the country.

What is more, the spate of public demonstrations - many of which took place in the capital Kuala Lumpur - would suggest that sections of the Malaysian public are more politically aware and politically literate than before. The BERSIH campaign calling for free and fair elections, for instance, was a movement that is rooted in Malaysia's civil society and which cut across the racial, ethnic and religious divides which have always been the salient markers of the Malaysian political landscape. Conversely the demonstrations organised by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) would suggest that communitarian and sectarian issues remain a defining factor of Malaysian politics until today.

All eyes will now be on the administration of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who faces the tough prospect of retaining the public's support for a second term.

Badawi came to power following the resignation of former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir Mohamad, who led - and in many ways transformed - Malaysia for more than two decades. In the immediate aftermath of Mahathir's unannounced resignation that stunned the nation, Badawi was chosen as his successor. Yet when Badawi came to power with an enormous mandate in the elections of 2004 (with one of the highest approval ratings ever given to any Malaysian leader) he promised a wide range of reforms that included the promise of greater accountability, transparency and a thorough overhaul of some of the key institutions of government including the civil service, judiciary and police force.

Four years on, there seems to be the widespread perception that the Badawi administration has failed to deliver. Despite earlier promises that the long-standing cases of alleged corruption and nepotism between government and the corporate sector were to be resolved, no major cases have been dealt with until now. Instead the Malaysian public has been witness to a number of embarrassing revelations about the murky dealings within the governmental system instead.

Another area where Badawi seems weak is his stand on Islam, which was encapsulated in his vision of a modern, progressive, 'Islam Hadari'. While admittedly Badawi has expressed the keen desire to see Islam understood and practiced in a universal, inclusive and tolerant manner, the realities on the ground would suggest that the religious authorities in the country have not taken heed of any of the universal principles he has espoused all along: The seizure of Bibles by Malaysian customs officers, the activities of the morality police that spy on the private lives of Malaysians, the banning of books that are deemed 'a threat' to Islam and Muslims, etc, have all prompted Malaysians to ask: 'What sort of modern, progressive Islam is this?'

But Badawi's greatest challenge to date has been the pervading presence of his former mentor Tun Mahathir himself. More than the danger of increased communitarian and sectarian politics, more than the challenge of a resurgent Islamic party (PAS) waiting to regain control of the Muslim-majority states, more than the challenge posed by the new generation of politically-conscious urban civil society activists and dedicated professional classes; it is the dominating presence of Tun Mahathir that looms over the Badawi government at the moment.

When Badawi promised a new era of transparency and openness, many observers of Malaysian politics noted that this was a departure from the ways of the Mahathir administration. To some extent it has to be said that Malaysia's civil society and media have indeed opened up, with issues being discussed in the public domain as never before. But this has also incurred a cost to the Badawi government, and it has irked those who were more comfortable with the ways of the Mahathir era when governance was strictly a top-down unilateral process with less public participation.

The down-sizing of several mammoth projects that were initiated during the Mahathir period, the revelation of corruption and abuse of power dating back to the 1980s, the attempt to introduce some degree of accountability to the workings of the police and security forces; etc have been seen as a means of overturning many of the developments made during Mahathir's time.

The former prime minister has further upped the stakes by publicly stating that Badawi was perhaps not the best man to replace him, and to suggest that Badawi may eventually be a 'one-term' prime minister.

This, then, is one of the core issues that really being fought out in the coming elections of Malaysia. While the Badawi government is pressed to take on the opposition parties and to address a host of demands from a wide section of Malaysia's now vocal civil society, the real - and perhaps only - threat to Badawi's position in power comes from the old guard of the ruling elite and governmental system itself, who do not relish the prospect of real, long term institutional change, reform and modernisation.

The 12th general elections of Malaysia will therefore determine whether the reform process continues, or whether institutional inertia will win the day.

(Dr Farish A Noor is a senior fellow at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University of Singapore; and one of the founders of the www. othermalaysia.org research site.)