For and against caretaker govt: Hasina’s style of “protecting” the constitution

By abolishing the non-partisan caretaker government that ensured free and fair elections, Sheikh Hasina and her party men had launched an extensive campaign portraying her as the biggest defender of the constitution.

"This is a historic moment for democracy," Hasina told parliament after it voted to rescind a 15-year-old requirement that parliamentary elections be overseen by a non-partisan interim government. "We can't allow unelected people to oversee national elections," said a boastful Hasina.

She had become a staunch protector of the new constitutional provision as it allowed her to stay in power during the general elections.

But she had little love for the constitution when she was not in power.

When she led her party to wage vigorous street agitations in 1994-96 for the introduction of the caretaker government system, Hasina did not pay heed to the then constitutional provision, which also did not allow unelected people in the form of a caretaker government to rule the country.

Her archrival Khaleda Zia, who won the 1991 elections, was supposed to be in office during the election to be held in 1996. But Hasina demanded Khaleda step down and elections be held under a non-partisan government. Why? Because she knew only a non-partisan government could ensure free and fair elections, as none of the elections held since independence of Bangladesh were free and fair.

Alongside the street agitations during 1994-96, Hasina also presented some models for the caretaker government.

In a bill submitted to the Parliament Secretariat on October 28, 1993, her party proposed amendment of Article 56 (4) of the Constitution and called for formation of an interim caretaker government headed by the sitting chief justice, or any other sitting judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court.

Hasina reiterated the proposal during mediation between the AL and the BNP-led government by a group of five eminent citizens trying to resolve the political standoff.

The proposal for making the chief justice or a judge of the Appellate Division was contrary to the then constitutional provision, as none of them are elected by the people.

Moreover, her proposal was also unconstitutional, as the constitution in no way allows the sitting chief justice or any other judge of the Appellate Division to hold another constitutional office.

As the then BNP government refused to accept the demand, Hasina's party intensified agitation. The violent street agitations, including blockade, non-cooperation movement and around 100 days of countrywide hartal forced the then BNP-led government to introduce the caretaker government system in 1996 by amending the constitution, to allow unelected people to run the country during the election period. The amendment made the provision that the immediate past chief justice be the first option to head the interim government.

In June 1996, in the parliamentary election held under the caretaker government led by former chief justice Habibur Rahman, Hasina won the polls and became the prime minister.

After a debacle in the 2001 election held under another caretaker government led by former chief justice Latifur Rahman, she came up with proposals for sweeping electoral reforms, which initially did not get momentum.  

Suddenly, the BNP government in 2004 passed the 14th constitutional amendment introducing the provision for 45 seats for women reserved for the next 10 years in parliament, and increased the retirement age of Supreme Court judges to 67 years from 65.

The increase in the retirement age of the judges confirmed Justice KM Hasan as the immediate past chief justice to head the interim government that would supervise the elections to be held after the end of the then government.

But Hasina refused to accept the constitutional amendment as it confirmed Justice Hasan as the head of the interim government, labelling him a "pro-BNP" man.

In 1994, the Magura by-election which was rigged by the BNP, added fuel to her demand for introduction of the non-partisan election time government, and this time Justice Hasan became an issue.

"Amid growing criticism for unsettling the election-time government issue, she and her party later launched a blistering attack on civil society members, who were then calling for a dialogue to resolve the political standoff centering the 2014 general elections, as the BNP-led opposition parties refused to join the polls under Hasina government. Hasina and her party leaders called civil society members as "key actors" in the 1/11 changeover. She forgot the fact that the Fakhruddin Ahmed-led government ultimately ensured a free and fair parliamentary election in which her party won a landslide and returned to power after a break of seven years."

Shakhawat Liton. Sketch: TBS

Amid violent political turmoil in October 2006, Justice Hasan declined to take office. Then the president opened talks among the parties, which also failed to resolve the crisis. At one stage, then president Iajuddin Ahmed assumed the office of the chief adviser without exploring other options to find a caretaker chief. 

Political crisis deepened as Hasina and her party intensified agitation to foil the election scheduled for 22 January 2007. In such a situation the armed forces intervened; Iajuddin stepped down as the chief advisor, declaring a state of emergency. The next day, a new interim government led by Fakhruddin Ahmed was formed.

After completion of massive electoral reforms, an election was held in December 2008, which was largely free and fair and Hasina won a landslide. This time, Hasina would come up with her new playbook to retain power by manipulating the elections.

After the end of her first term as the prime minister in 1996-2001, she transferred power to the caretaker government that supervised the 2001 elections in which her party expected to win, but suffered an election debacle.

After returning to power seven years later, Hasina opted not to transfer power to a non-partisan caretaker government after the end of her second term. Banking on a Supreme Court's split verdict, she abolished the caretaker government in 2011.

Her critics said she used the apex court to cancel the election time non-partisan government. The then chief justice, who played the key role in declaring the caretaker government system illegal, was rewarded with a lucrative contractual job after his retirement, which he held until he resigned on 13 August this year.

Why did Hasina, who had struggled for a non-partisan caretaker government, abolish the non-partisan caretaker system that had ensured four free and fair general elections in Bangladesh in 1991, 1996, 2001 and lastly in 2008?

Hasina understood the political reality and anti-incumbency psyche of Bangladeshi people. No ruling party can return to power in the immediate next polls, if held under a non-partisan government.

The cancellation of the caretaker government allowed her to hold three stage-managed elections in 2014, 2018 and latest in January 2024 to cling to power, trampling the election system. Free and fair elections, which are the cornerstone of constitutional democracy, have been made a victim of enforced disappearance.  

Her governments, formed through three elections that denied people's right to vote, suffered from a legitimacy crisis. Her 15-year regime has been marred by rampant violation of people's civil and political rights, denial of the legitimacy of her political opponents, use of excessive force to muzzle dissenting voices and protests.

None of the tactics she applied to cling to power was in conformity with the constitution, though she never paused to claim her regime as elected by people, and that her government has been successful in ensuring continuity of the democratic process in the country.

Hasina and the 1/11 changeover

Hasina, who had once welcomed the army-backed caretaker government of 2007-8, suddenly became highly critical of them, when she claimed "it was wrong that it stayed beyond its mandated three months and delayed voting by about two years."

Amid growing criticism for unsettling the election-time government issue, she and her party later launched a blistering attack on civil society members, who were then calling for a dialogue to resolve the political standoff centering the 2014 general elections, as the BNP-led opposition parties refused to join the polls under Hasina government. Hasina and her party leaders called civil society members as "key actors" in the 1/11 changeover.

She forgot the fact that the Fakhruddin Ahmed-led government ultimately ensured a free and fair parliamentary election in which her party won a landslide and returned to power after a break of seven years.

Amid a protracted political standoff over the one-sided parliamentary polls slated for January 22 in 2007, then President Iajuddin Ahmed was forced to resign as chief adviser and declare a state of emergency on the night of January 11.

The following day, Fakhruddin Ahmed, a former Bangladesh Bank governor, was appointed and sworn in as chief adviser to a new caretaker government.

Hasina herself had emphatically endorsed the changeover claiming it a result of the movement her own party had led.

The armed forces had played a crucial role in the changeover amid growing political turmoil caused mainly by the then AL-led 14-party combine's persistent street agitations to resist one-sided polls.

"The caretaker government [led by Fakhruddin Ahmed] is an outcome of the Awami League-led alliance's movement," Hasina told reporters on March 15, 2007 at what was then Zia International Airport before leaving for the United States. 

She had also declared that if voted to power, her party would legitimise the caretaker government, as it "earned the confidence and appreciation of the people."

But she changed her mind after abolishing the caretaker government in 2011 and started to blast the Fakhruddin-led government and civil society members, who called for dialogue to resolve the political standoff.

 "These eminent citizens benefited the most during the tenures of the undemocratic and unconstitutional system in the past…. The key players in 1/11 have again become vocal these days," she said on December 29 in 2013, a day after some eminent citizens suggested the government defer the one-sided January 5, 2014 national polls to make it participatory and credible. 

SInce then, her regime gradually mounted attacks on civil society members to muzzle their voices against any wrongdoings of her government. 

Only the collapse of her regime on 5 August gave the people freedom to publicly call her an authoritarian ruler.