How necessary is reform, and how sustainable can it be?

The word “reform” is short, but its meaning and significance are immense and multifaceted. According to the Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries, it means: “to make an improvement, especially by changing a person's behaviour or the structure of something.”

The 6 reform commissions formed in the country's changing situation have finalized their recommendations and submitted them to the chief adviser and they have been published. It is very good. There were enough knowledgeable people involved in the reform commission and I think some of them are wholeheartedly seeking reforms. If the country can come out of the traditional political obstacles and the lack of policy and ideology through reforms, the countrymen will be relieved. There is no way to deny that a lot of garbage has accumulated not only in Sheikh Hasina's 15-year rule, but also in the 54 years of independence. This garbage has accumulated everywhere, from the administration, political parties to the judiciary, autonomous institutions. From the 54 years of different governments, the last 15 years of Sheikh Hasina's executive orders, notifications and law-making, the system of rule by one party or one group was entrenched. There is no doubt that it is necessary to get out of this.

I have read the published reform proposals carefully. It must be assumed that the reform proposals have been made with good intentions; but some weaknesses have been seen in the reform process, which can create a more complex situation. Since public administration is very important, some discussion can be held on this one reform. First of all, it is good to say that Abdul Mueed Chowdhury, the head of the Public Administration Reform Commission, has worked with a reputation as an experienced civil service officer and there is no doubt that he is the right person for this job. However, two or three organizations have already rejected the recommendations of the Reform Commission. That is from their own perspective. The recommendations include several issues, which are undoubtedly positive. For example, emphasis has been placed on the introduction of e-services, suggestions have been made to update the website, suggestions have been made to form district citizen committees and upazila citizen committees to monitor activities, recommendations have been made to reduce 43 ministries to 25. There is a recommendation not to ask for political identity in police verification. In addition, recommendations have been made to introduce the provincial system, divide Faridpur and Comilla into divisions, abolish district councils, strengthen upazilas, and give more responsibility to union councils, which is actually the name of decentralization of power. There are several other promising recommendations.

However, some fundamental weaknesses are evident in the recommendations, which may complicate—rather than streamline—the future functioning of the civil administration. Considering space constraints, we would like to highlight just a couple of examples.

For instance, Clause 6.12 states: “It is recommended that the Deputy Commissioner (DC), in his role as District Magistrate, be given the authority to accept complaints of the nature of CR (Cognizable Report) cases. He may instruct any official of the Upazila or respected members of society to conduct an inquiry or arbitration. If the preliminary investigation finds the complaint valid, the DC may direct the police station to register the case.”

A CR case is essentially a complaint case. Undoubtedly, if implemented, this recommendation would significantly expand the powers of the District Magistrate. However, in civil or criminal matters, this could lead to complex legal challenges. It may create confusion among citizens regarding access to justice and blur the lines between the judiciary and the administration. In the past, we have seen resistance and dissatisfaction in judicial circles regarding mobile courts operated by executive magistrates.

Another point is: It is said in 9.6, 'In the past, it has been seen that many civil service officers have been harassed or deprived of promotion or OSD during the tenure of the next government due to their duties as Private Secretary (PS) / Assistant Private Secretary to the Minister / Minister of State. To avoid such a situation, the Private Secretary/Assistant Private Secretary to the Minister/Minister of State can be appointed from outside the civil service as per the intention of the Ministers.’

In the political reality of the country, such a decision will on the contrary involve politicians more in administrative work. It is true that a secretary understands administrative work with his experience, a politically engaged person will not understand it, no matter how talented he is. If this recommendation is accepted in the reality of our country, political interference in administration will increase. The point is to remove malpractices from the country. No matter how many reforms you do, how many commissions, search committees, task forces, pilot projects you do - if a culture of honesty, goodwill and non-partisanship is not developed in administrative work, no positive result will be achieved.

Now let me tell you a story. It was 25 years ago. I was sitting in a restaurant in Munich. There was silence. One or two people were coming in and going out. Two tables away from me, two gentlemen were sitting and eating something like soup. Some of the people entering and leaving the restaurant were just saying hello in German to the man at that table, and he was also saying ‘hello’. In a while, the Bengali I had been waiting for, who had been living in Germany for a long time, arrived. He also said ‘hello’ to the man. I looked at him with a question. The Bengali said, do you know him? I shook my head in the negative and he said, ‘He is the mayor of Munich, Christian Ude. Very popular.’ Looking at him with unaccustomed eyes, I thought, there is no crowd of people, no courtroom, what kind of mayor is this! Even in a world-famous city like Munich?

In the 2020 U.S. presidential election, then-President Donald Trump was defeated. According to protocol, on January 6, 2021, during a joint session of Congress to formally certify Joe Biden’s victory through the counting of electoral ballots, Trump supporters stormed the Capitol building in Washington, D.C. Trump refused to accept his loss in that election. We all more or less know the chaos and uproar that followed in the country.

After much political conflict and verbal clashes, this time Kamala Harris—the candidate nominated by Joe Biden’s party—unexpectedly loses to Donald Trump. On January 20, during Trump’s inauguration, the defeated candidate Kamala Harris and President Biden attend the ceremony in accordance with tradition. They never even considered the possibility of another January 6 incident. The transition of power took place peacefully. They remained present at Trump’s swearing-in ceremony for an extended time, strictly adhering to democratic norms.

This adherence to democratic norms highlights a crucial truth: more than reform, what the country truly needs is a change in its political culture and mindset.

I hope our reforms are successful; But until this liberal attitude is practiced in our political culture, no reform seems likely to be very successful. Secondly, it is necessary to ensure that the reforms implemented by the current government will be maintained by the next elected government. If they do not maintain them and go to parliament and reverse them, then the reforms may become ineffective. Who is giving us this guarantee?

We hope our reforms will be successful. However, as long as such a liberal and open-minded attitude is not practiced in our political culture, it is hard to believe that any reform will achieve meaningful success. Secondly, it must be ensured that the reforms introduced by the current government are upheld by the next elected government. If the incoming administration overturns or alters them in parliament, the reforms may become ineffective. But who is giving us that assurance?

Mohsin Habib: Journalist, writer, international affairs analyst.