March 14, 2025
DHAKA – It was quite an experience to be invited by the National Citizen Party (NCP) to attend their inaugural Iftar party last Tuesday. I enjoyed being there. I remembered my own first attendance as a student at a somewhat similar event. It was the 10th National Conference of the East Pakistan Students Union (EPSU), held in the late sixties at the Engineers’ Institute. The similarity lay in the composition of the participants—mostly young students. Their energy, their dreamy eyes, and the eagerness in everything they did took me back nearly six decades to my own young dreams of building an egalitarian society, as most of us then were fully converted to the Marxist views that permeated the progressive ideologies of that era.
Bangladesh needs a new political party with youthful energy, spirited patriotism, and genuine love for the poor and downtrodden. We need a party full of dreams for a future without any shackles of oppression and exploitation. We need a party that will take us to the future and not drag us into the past. For too long, we have been governed by a politics and politicians whose only interest was to promote personal and partisan interests. We need a political party truly devoted to serving the interests of democracy, the rights of all, and prosperity for the masses.
The NCP seem full of potential. Some fundamental issues remain unclear—its ideological orientation, acceptance of our diversity, approach to our cultural heritage, views on the role of religion in politics, short- and long-term goals, etc. It should publish its party charter as soon as possible.
A smell of change was mildly, almost imperceptibly, floating in the air. There was an atmosphere of expectation that most of us strongly felt, and a definite sense of determination that I silently admired. As I sat amidst a splendidly diverse group of students and guests, I realised the wide appeal of NCP and its potential to emerge—if not immediately—as a significant political party.
While I sat and watched the event unfold and heard the three speeches of their top leaders—the very fact that only three spoke and not a plethora of them impressed me—the question that was repeatedly crossing my mind was: are these students and their leaders fully equipped to handle the challenges of setting up a new political party, especially in the face of the disappointing performance of past political parties? Are they aware that thousands of venomous snakes were hovering around them, waiting with boxes full of ill-gotten money to flood them with? Will they be able to judge which offers of help are genuine and which ones are traps? Will they be able to change the culture of sycophancy that so afflicted our traditional parties?
The history of Bangladesh from 1972-1991 is a mixture of euphoric beginnings with endless dreams of making a modern, secular, democratic, and prosperous country, which ended with the formation of a one-party state and the assassination of Bangabandhu. This was followed by two military coups that brought in two generals—General Ziaur Rahman and General HM Ershad—into power, both of whom formed their respective parties while in power—Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and Jatiya Party (JP)—that ruled Bangladesh in the subsequent years.
Three of our major political parties—AL, BNP, and JP—all became dynastic, with the founding family driving them. Their inner democracy was non-existent, with the various levels of party hierarchy being selected rather than elected, and that also at the whim of one person. Ironically, Jamaat was the only one that followed some structure of bottom-up representation.
Looking back over the last 54 years of independent Bangladesh, and especially over the last 34 years since the restoration of democracy and elected government, there are vital lessons to be learned about the role of political parties.
The saddest part was that they always put the leader’s interest above that of the party, and the party’s above that of the nation. Not public interest, but the party’s benefit was the goal. None of the big parties had any internal democracy, and their inner workings were totally centralised to the extent of one person making all the decisions—his or her wish was the command. Nepotism and cronyism were the order of the day, which inevitably led to the emergence of loyal groups that usurped the party hierarchy and destroyed discipline. They never held their annual organisational elections on time and in a free and independent manner. It was always top-down selection of leadership from the lowest tier to the very top, except for the top post and a few of their favourites.
Over the years, party positions could be “availed of” for money, and the term “nomination trade” became prominent every time we had national elections. MP nomination seekers had to spend enormous amounts to get the party ticket. All of that money was retrieved after becoming an MP, as a large portion of the development funds became means of “returns for investment,” which, of course, was many times over the original. What was called a donation for the party fund was, in effect, extortion for personal gain, not necessarily always for the top person but for everyone along the way who could influence the process.
Corruption was ingrained in the political parties, which spread to the bureaucracy, and the corrupt elements within it took full advantage and quickly, enthusiastically, and irretrievably aligned themselves with that process. The police became an instrument of coercion, abuse, and extortion. The involvement of the political parties in widespread corruption ensured that the bureaucracy, the police, the judiciary, and, of course, the corporate world would never be held accountable. A section of the media, forced by its owners and some willing journalists, became a part of it.
It is in this background of myopic, shortsighted, and self-serving history of our political parties that a new political party, led by students of the July-August movement that liberated us from the clutches of corrupt dictatorship, is being formed. How they will fare is the big question of the moment.
The fact that NCP avoids terms like party president, secretary-general, etc, and calls themselves “convenors” is a good sign. It narrows the differences in their hierarchy. At the Iftar referred to above, I heard one over-enthusiastic announcer calling their leader “jana neta” and “ek dafar ghoshok.” This should be avoided. Let’s not fall into the trap of self-promotion and let history judge who is what.
Getting into power should not be the main motivator of NCP, but public service. The most important party culture to pursue, and one that will distinguish it from others, will be accountability—both to the public but equally importantly, to its own grassroots workers. A vital practice to be inculcated is financial transparency. The absence of this mostly destroyed all our traditional political parties. Today, AL looks like the most rotten party ever because it was in power with total impunity. BNP looks good because it has been oppressed and forcibly kept out of power through rigged elections. One can only guess what it would look like if things were different. As Jamaat has mostly been out of power, we have no data to judge them on the “money” issue. During the period it held two vital ministries in a coalition government with BNP, questions did circulate about its unethical behaviour. Today, it is mostly accused of pushing its candidate into vital posts, not on the basis of merit but party loyalty. This is corruption in another name.
NCP held two expensive but necessary events—the Manik Mia Avenue launch and the Intercontinental Iftar. We think they both were sponsored, which can be accepted only if the sponsors’ names are made public. As a new party, it will obviously need sponsors. A good idea would be to take multiple sponsors, never one or two, and on the condition that they do not insist on secrecy. Make their names public. This will set NCP apart in a way that will give them tremendous credibility—which is vital in the present context and at this stage of party formation.
We need a new political party, and we need one that is rooted in a recent struggle against all forms of abuse of power. But we also need a new political culture, including a change in the functioning of political parties. It must be democratised and made accountable. We repeat, many of our failures can be directly attributed to the culture of putting the leader’s interest above that of the party and the party’s interest above that of the nation. NCP has the potential to change all of this.
Three practices—accountability, transparency, and inner democracy—will make all the difference. We wish them all the best on this new journey.