Administrative depoliticization: A prerequisite for breaking the stagnation

According to modern political science, a state is formed based on four essential elements: independence and sovereignty, a defined territory, population, and government. These components are interrelated, and without any one of them, a modern and complete state cannot exist. Among these, the weakest and only changeable element is the government. The government is not the owner of the country; rather, it is a trustee responsible for running the state on behalf of its people. Governments come and go, but the other three components of the state remain unchanged. Whether a government stays in power or not depends on the will of the people. If citizens become dissatisfied with the government, they can change even the most powerful administration through elections.

The government owns no property within the state; it is merely the guardian of state assets. We often refer to institutions as "government institutions," but this is incorrect. These are, in fact, state-owned institutions. Those employed in these institutions are not government officers or employees but rather officials and employees of the republic.

The primary duty of an official or employee of the republic is to remain loyal to the ruling government and follow its directives. If the top level of government issues an order that is harmful to the state, an official can formally express disagreement in written notes. However, in reality, there is little room to defy orders from superiors in Bangladesh's state institutions. In most cases, higher officials dictate what should be written in those notes. If an official refuses to comply, they risk being labeled as supporters of the opposition and subjected to harassment, such as career stagnation, transfers to remote locations, or even dismissal.

Additionally, officials may face fabricated corruption charges. In Bangladesh, securing a job is like catching a golden deer. No employee wants to risk losing their job. While a state-employed official may have personal political beliefs, they cannot express or engage in political activities while in service. However, in recent years, an increasing number of officials and employees in state-run institutions have been openly engaging in political activities under various banners, especially aligning themselves with the ruling party.

After the fall of former military ruler H. M. Ershad due to a mass movement in 1990, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) formed a government in 1991 through elections under a caretaker government. At that time, a limited number of "Zia Parishad" groups began to form within state institutions. In 1996, when the Awami League came to power, most state-owned institutions saw the emergence of "Bangabandhu Parishad." Until 2006, officials alternated between supporting Zia Parishad and Bangabandhu Parishad. However, after the Awami League came to power in 2008, every state-run office saw the forced establishment of Bangabandhu Parishad groups, which actively engaged in political activities.

Officials who engage in political activities within state institutions only do so when their preferred party is in power. When that party loses power, they disappear from the scene. They are opportunists, not genuine well-wishers of their political parties. They contribute nothing to bringing their preferred party to power but damage its popularity through various misdeeds while in office.

Over the past 15 years, the ruling party has paralyzed state institutions through rampant politicization. Since 2008, the Awami League has held three national elections (2014, 2018, and 2024) under its rule, none of which gained national or international legitimacy. The most controversial and one-sided elections in history have taken place during its tenure. Ironically, the same Awami League that once fought for a caretaker government shamelessly removed that provision from the constitution by citing court rulings.

The ruling party appointed members of the Sheikh family and close associates to various key positions, facilitating corruption. They placed loyalists and relatives in top positions of state institutions, opening the floodgates of corruption. By keeping controversial and corrupt relatives in high positions for years, they enabled systemic corruption. When a government is confident about staying in power indefinitely, accountability diminishes. The former Prime Minister once remarked that even her household staff had become multimillionaires. A former director-general of the Health Department had a driver, Abdul Malek, who amassed wealth worth billions. Similarly, a driver at the Public Service Commission, Abed Ali, became a billionaire by leaking exam questions. State institutions were turned into personal fiefdoms.

Many of these individuals remain in key positions today. There is hardly a single state-owned institution that has not been subjected to politicization or nepotism in leadership appointments. It is rumored that vice-chancellorships in public universities were sold for millions. Those who bought high-ranking positions saw their first task as recovering their "investment" through corruption.

The rampant corruption in state institutions is largely a result of excessive politicization. From 2009 to 2023, an estimated $23.4 billion (2.8 trillion BDT) was illegally transferred abroad from Bangladesh, according to a White Paper Committee report. Bureaucrats allegedly took 980 billion BDT in bribes, while politicians received 1.4 trillion BDT in illicit payments. Bangladeshi citizens own 532 properties in Dubai and 3,600 "second homes" in Malaysia, with many of these properties belonging to government officials. The official salaries and benefits of state employees are not sufficient to afford such investments abroad, raising serious concerns about corruption. Allegations suggest that corruption in government institutions had direct links to the highest levels of the previous administration.

Like opium, which keeps a person in a trance, unchecked corruption allowed officials to remain blindly loyal to the government. Today, a sense of stagnation is evident within the administration, allegedly due to loyalists of the previous government deliberately obstructing progress. Without the sincere cooperation of the bureaucracy and government institutions, no administration can effectively solve national problems or implement policies for public welfare. The medieval ruler Muhammad bin Tughluq implemented far-sighted policies ahead of his time, but he failed due to a lack of bureaucratic support. He was the first to introduce paper currency in the Indian subcontinent, which we use today.

A thorough investigation is necessary into officials who engaged in political activities within state institutions under the previous government. Corrupt and partisan officials should be immediately removed from their positions. Leaving enemies behind while embarking on a mission is unwise; similarly, keeping politically biased officials in place will never allow for proper governance. The stagnation observed in post-regime-change administration is due to the entrenched loyalists of the past government.

Officials who were involved in partisan politics while in service should be dismissed, while those who have retired should have their pensions revoked. Employment regulations should be amended to ensure that no future government employees even dream of engaging in political activities while in office.

M A Khaleq: Retired Banker and Economic Affairs Analyst