|
Hon'ble Prime
Minister and the Guest of Honour, Hon'ble Minister of
Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Distinguished
Participants in the Conference on Committee Systems,
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
It
is with an extremely profound sense of happiness, pride
and privilege that I welcome you all. That the
Honourable Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has graciously
agreed to inaugurate this Conference and address our
gathering speaks of her supportive commitment to the
Parliament, to the Institute of Parliamentary Studies
and to our efforts for strengthening parliamentary
democracy. We are beholden to her. As I address this
distinguished gathering, I remember our debates, not too
long ago, when together we decided to re-establish a
different system of Government for our Nation.
Unanimously, all political leaders and Members of
Parliament agreed on a constitutional amendment. We, as
all democratic societies, had to choose between two
models of free parliamentarism, the Westminster model
and the presidential system. We must have had Abraham
Lincoln's sentence in mind: "No man is good
enough to govern another man without that other's
consent."
We
chose a model where the Executive power would be strong,
but the Parliament would neither be in conflict nor
dominated by Government. We chose a model where the
Parliament would not rule the country, but make
accountable those who would rule it. And we chose a
model where the Government would not control the
Parliament, leaving to the House the oversight of the
Executive Power. Political science has given us the
theory. Statistics and history have provided us with
data. It has been demonstrated that the vast majority of
the stable democracies of the world today are
parliamentary regimes, where executive power is
generated by legislative majorities and depends on such
majorities for survival. In countries as dissimilar as
Chile, South Korea, Brazil and Turkey, policy-makers and
constitutional experts have vigorously debated the
relative merit of different types of democratic regimes
and it is widely agreed that the only presidential
democracy with a long history of constitutional
continuity is the United States of America.
Parliamentary democracies, of course, can also be
unstable and subject to bitter conflicts, as we see
these days happening at our borders. It remains that the
superior historic performance of parliamentary regimes
is not an accident, and on balance, has been more
conducive to stable democracy than presidential systems.
In
a parliamentary form of government, the Assembly becomes
a Parliament. Ministers are usually Members of the
House. A collective body called Government or Cabinet is
responsible before Parliament, and only indirectly
responsible before the electorate. The Government is not
elected directly by the voters, but is appointed
indirectly from amongst the representatives whom they
elect to the Assembly. For this reason, we say that
Parliament is supreme. It is the focus of power in the
political system, as the fusion of the executive and
legislative powers in Parliament is established in the
constitution. For a reasonable equilibrium of these
powers within the House, the Government must not fear
the constant challenge, which the Assembly offers to its
programme. The Assembly, in turn, must resist the
temptation to usurp the functions of Government. When I
describe these general guidelines of such a
parliamentary system, I believe that the Constitution of
Bangladesh and our recent practice is perfectly
inscribed in this frame. We are, and we want to continue
to be, a State with a parliamentary form of Government.
Parliaments are the elected voice of the common man.
Parliamentarians are also the sole lawmakers. As Thomas
Jefferson, the drafter of the American Declaration of
Independence, said in 1792: "From the nature of
things, every society must at all times possess within
itself the sovereign powers of legislation."
Democracy
is finally getting entrenched throughout South Asia.
When I addressed my colleagues the Speakers and the
Parliamentarians of the SAARC countries, I said that
Bangladesh had had difficulties with democracy. We have
seen in our recent history how a long period of military
rule has been sometimes disguised as a democratic
tenure. Governments assured their continuity through
influencing elections. Allow me here to quote the Bard,
who writes, "Oh! It is excellent to have a
giant's strength, but it is tyrannous to use it like a
giant." For this reason, our Parliament
approved a unique constitutional amendment for
installing a non-partisan, neutral, care-taker
Government, three months before every general election.
The right of people to vote freely was in this way
restored to them. We have added to the right to vote,
the freedom of thought and the freedom of speech. These
are good developments for our country. Parliamentary
authority, having finally been won, must now be
protected.
It
is in this sense that we would like to strengthen the
parliamentary committees, as one of the basic tools of
the House and of all its Members to discharge their
duty. The early years of parliamentarism did not have
Committees. Everything was stated, debated and approved
in the House. Parliamentarians were summoned for a few
days in a year, they heard the Ministers speak, they
responded and voted and then returned to their
constituencies. Nowadays, parliamentary decision-making
involves a deeper complexity. The demands of a
democratic society and of an informed public opinion are
higher. There has to be a mechanism, which allows draft
Bills to be presented before a smaller group of Members,
to be discussed and debated. There must be a mechanism,
which allows policies to be explained to
Parliamentarians who can contribute with specialised
knowledge. And there must be a mechanism, which allows
public accounts to be scrutinized by MPs who have been
following up the budget. This is the origin of the
evolution of the Parliamentary Committees. For these
reasons, I believe that strengthening the parliamentary
committee system is a must. Committees are the very core
of the parliamentary machinery.
Excellencies,
I once again extend my welcome and gratitude to you,
Parliamentarians and guests, for kindly coming and
joining us here in this Conference. May the stay of our
foreign guests in Bangladesh be enjoyable and our common
deliberations fruitful. May these usher in a set of
sound proposals and suggestions for the strengthening of
parliamentary democracy. Thank you.
|
