These procedures and requirements are likely to play a significant role in the essential elements of an implied important public policy.  To trade off ‘public policy’ and favour the client’s urgency for food, etc and especially if the impact of the decision is likely to impact on children and/or the aged can be very disturbing; or as Lipsky put it “rationing resources to screening and routinizing clients” undermine the logic of disciplined and logical public policy.

The bottom line of Lipsky’s argument is that the street level bureaucrats in the US tend to take a conservative stand when individualised decisions apply to members of the client community. Furthermore, one should not exclude the possibility that the monetary benefit that should go to the client may be less if the decision to bypass a procedural requirement is implemented; “better food now than later.” In most developed countries one expects members of the bureaucracy to follow government policy. Yet, when the bureaucrat deviates from public policy there is usually little negative impact on the client.

In Bangladesh, the professional bureaucrats live in a very different world. Firstly, they are mostly underpaid which does not cancel out that most of them do not have much work to do. It is fair to say that the country’s civil service reflects of form of welfare assistance; the lower the level of the staff, the more likely that their “work” reflects a form of assistance to the needy. One should therefore expect that this category of “street level bureaucrat” would seek to find a response to their job. They would be ‘grateful’ to the government for keeping their jobs and therefore serve the public with integrity.

Unfortunately,   this is not the case. They behave as if they are “little Mughals” waiting to be served by the public! This is not unique to Bangladesh. The practice is common in other poor countries. In one predominantly Christian island of the Caribbean the practice of having to pay a government employee for legitimate free service is signalled by using the letters “YMCA” which is the acronym for an international organisation that is known as the Young Men’s Christian Association and in government employee-citizen relations means You Must Come Across – a form of “cool language” that means “no pay, no service.”!

Bangladesh newspapers publish story after story how people are being ripped off when they visit a government office seeking a service. Remember that our education minister had to set up a ‘sealed complain box’ in the education directorate to curb the corrupt practices of the employees. Similar measures were also ordered by the recently appointed communication minister who saw evidence of ‘helping hands’ while visiting BRTA. The most conspicuous was a report published by daily Prothom Alo describing a parallel set of office arrangements for police officers in local police stations. It was reported that police officers appointed their own ‘aides’ who negotiate with clients on behalf of the officers! All these claims have been crystallised by a recent Transparency International report which claimed that about two third of persons visiting government offices were forced to pay bureaucrats for a service.

The question remains, why is corruption so rampant among the government bureaucracy in general and the service sector in particular? The conventional wisdom points at the low salary structure of government employees. Employees who suffer from low income and struggle to obtain the basic necessities are likely to develop certain dishonest practices. However, if this line of argument is true, then every working citizen who strives for his/her everyday survival is bound to be a delinquent. Since this is not the case, one prime reason of corruption is the nexus that exists between the practice of politics and government bureaucracy.

We are aware of the process how political connection brings positional benefits to a certain segment of bureaucrats. Political linkage also helps gain illegal wealth. During the period of the military regimes certain senior bureaucrats used their political connection to amass huge amount of wealth. A prime example was the case of the secretary of power ministry who was convicted of amassing illegal wealth. One could also remember all those top bureaucrats who confessed before the “Truth Commission” commissioned by the military-controlled caretaker government. When a corrupt individual becomes a top executive of a government department, we need not to be rocket scientist to anticipate how the lower order of the rank-and-file would operate under him.

Though mainstream bureaucrats are prohibited by the law to demonstrate their affinity to politics (at least in public), street level bureaucrats do not care much about any legal barrier. Their political connection is explicit and is often used for malicious ends. The most common way how street level bureaucrats legitimate their illegal actions is through the collective bargaining agency (CBA).

Over the last two decades, the nature of CBA has been transformed from protecting employees’ interest to a self-serving club of CBA leaders. Perhaps, the way that many of our CBA leaders use their collective power to serve their own interests is unique in the world. These so-called leaders line themselves up behind the ministers in political meetings and often express their readiness for supreme sacrifices (!) for the party in power.

When a new political government is sworn in the leaders just change their ‘Kibla’ and reiterate the same promise for the new government. This new alignment is not to serve the interest of the workers but to serve themselves. There are overwhelming evidences to conclude that many CBA leaders have become self-serving and not only violate their service regulations but also shamelessly use the power of the agency to rob public resources.

Despite the fact that political connection facilitates corruption, yet politics cannot be the sole cause of corruption. There are other factors that are more or less contributing to the process of corruption. Many global and local forces have been unleashed that has transformed the old fabric of the society to a new one. Nowadays, we are the integral part of ‘metropolitan mind’ and ‘money economy’ where consumption especially reckless consumption is the standard marker of social status. We want to consume everything within and beyond our capacity and would like to secure some for our offspring.

At the societal level, this overarching demand has destabilised the base of the old social control which was mainly constitutive of honesty, sincerity and high ethics. At the personal and family levels an increasing pressure for consumption has gradually decayed the ‘old morale’ and replaced that inherent system with ‘greed’ and ‘self-indulgence’. With the absence of any role model in our immediate matrix including family, schools, neighbourhood, and work place, as well as observing the triumphs of corrupts, we either teach our young children or other members to accept “win by any means.” This new reality is the one of the driving forces of corruption.

Another important factor is the acceptance of corruption by the society at large. The corrupt individual was once contemplated as ‘unacceptable’ to everyone. This notion has shifted and we are now ready to recognise some forms of corruption as a model of success. There are also attempts by corrupt individuals to buy out everyone or everything by their illegal wealth. In a poverty-ridden Bangladesh, it is not too hard to buy people or the institution. When the political machine and state institutions are patrons of corruption, buying out or suppressing the ‘honest’ ones is not a hard job.

This is the appropriate time we stand up against the corrupt bureaucracy especially against these corrupt street level bureaucrats. We have a small country with an unnecessary large bureaucracy. There are hundreds of positions in government offices that are not well-defined and hard to justify why they exist. For instance, many government offices have a position called ‘type-writer/computer operator’. Other than few important offices (such as court system) it is hard to justify why such positions are relevant in serving public. One might argue that our middle-range bureaucrats are not in the ‘practice’ of typing. This ‘colonial mindset’ of bureaucrats needs to be replaced with service-oriented mindset. Remember, some of these positions are so intertwined with corruption that only elimination of these positions could ensure a better service.

Unfortunately, until we install an efficient mechanism of accountability by overhauling the bureaucracy, any attempts to curb corruption would bring least desired outcome. The current government expressed its intention to overhaul the bureaucracy, but as the time passes we see “all quiet in reform form”.

———————————-
Hasan Reza holds a faculty position at Shah Jalal University of Science and Technology, and is currently pursuing his doctoral studies at the University of Chicago, USA.

Members of the Islami Oikya Jote (IOJ) shout slogans during April 4 hartal. PHOTO: REUTERS

The recent Hartal by Islamist demagogues has claimed to be tantamount to a ‘crusade’ against the ‘infidels’! Past experiences suggest that similar ‘crusades’ by the Islamist zealots have always been waged against the progressive forces of the country (such as against Taslima Nasrin, Humayun Azad and Shamsur Rahman). In the present occasion, the ‘infidels’ are not communists or progressive culturists but the leader of the centre-left party Awami League and the country’s sitting prime minister Sheikh Hasina.

The prime minister’s ‘infidelity’ is deemed to originate from the government’s proposed “Women’s Policy” which, according to these self-proclaimed Islamic pundits and their disciples, is in conflict with the interpretation of the Holy Quran. The zealots propagated that the Holy Quran is ‘under attack’ by the ‘infidel’ prime minister and her cabinet and the only way to ‘protect the integrity of the Quran’ is to oust Hasina’s government of power and establish a ‘Khilafat’.

Under the guise of a hartal, the citizens of the country experienced major inconveniences. In addition, numerous public and private properties were damaged. The most outrageous aspect of this movement was their use of very young children to impose hartal. Thousands of minor madrassa students were engaged in different parts of the country to enforce something that is beyond their comprehension. Some of these children were as young as 8 years old!

Many newspapers have reported that these children were brain-washed and were brought to the street by their teachers. Can these zealots provide us an Islamic interpretation of the use of children in destructing public property and inflicting pain on the ordinary Muslims? The leader of the group who pretends to be a Mufti must know that no religion (including Islam) would ever sanction destruction of public and private property and exploitation of children for political purposes. Another disgusting aspect of these Mullahs’ reactions is the choice of words. The use of vulgar languages directed at the country’s elected prime minister, who herself is a practicing Muslim, in the public meetings by the so-called Islamists prove nothing but their class!

One MUST understand that Bangladesh was established as a secular republic at its birth by the sovereign will of its people. The fundamental on which the country separated from ‘Islamist Pakistan’ was its secular cultural fabric. The post-1975 efforts of the military dictators who deflowered the secular fabric of the constitution have been trashed by the recent verdicts from the country’s apex court. In essence, what would be the nature of the republic is a settled issue.

Those who are against the constitution are not only in a course of direct collision against the sovereign will of the people but also under ‘political intoxication’ to bring back ‘Pakistani model’ of Islamic Republic. The so-called Mufti and its political organisation (IOJ) must also understand that the republic is run by a written constitution, NOT by the whims of some half-educated fanatics.

The constitution of Bangladesh clearly states the inalienable rights an ordinary folk would enjoy by virtue of his/her status as a citizen. Article 27 of the constitution promulgates that “[all] citizens are equal before law and are entitled to equal protection of law”. This has been fortified further under article 28.1 stating that “[the] State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth”. Article 27.2 nullifies any disparity between men and women stating that “[women] shall have equal rights with men in all spheres of the State and of public life”. This promulgation of equality and equity before law goes one step further when the constitution states under article 27.4 that “Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making special provision in favour of women or children or for the advancement of any backward section of citizens”.

The above article provides all the necessary authority and legality to legitimise government formulation of policy/laws including the ‘Rights of Women’. The government’s proposed “Women’s Policy” is guided by this provision. Do not forget that the proposed policy is about women who are disadvantaged in every conceivable way. Starting from birth to death, a girl child in Bangladesh encounters continuing forms of discrimination, deprivation and inequality.

With few exceptions, the birth of a girl child in Bangladesh is not a welcoming incident in an ordinary working family. Rather, she would be treated as a burden. It is very likely that a poor girl child would experience their future as a maid or in some other hazardous job rather than attending school. Once she is a teenager she would be forced to marry an unknown man after paying an awful lot of dowry that her poor father could barely afford. Naturally, she would be deprived of her father’s inheritance since her marriage cost a huge debt to the family. Despite her sacrifices to satisfy her husband and his family, she would be treated as an inferior human being. Since she is married to an older man she is likely to be widow at her middle age and she is likely to be thrown out by her husband’s family. If she is able, she would make her ends meet by selling labour. In her old age, she would be treated a nuisance to everyone.

The proposed policy is a first step toward ending the above vignettes of about 70 million women in Bangladesh. The policy is far from being perfect, it only vaguely touches some of the contemporary issues women encounters in their everyday life (such as economic opportunity, right to education, workplace support etc.). The policy is far from dealing with some of the core issues of discrimination. One particular example is the law regarding women’s inheritance of father’s property. The Muslim Family Law which prevails in the country is utterly discriminatory. The legal provision that a male son would inhere twice the amount provided to a girl bestows a ‘half status’ compared to her brother.

The differential treatment on the basis of gender regarding inheritance shares violates the dignity of a girl and her rights to be treated as equal to men. This is also against the fundamentals of the constitution as described under the article 27.2. Yet, such an important issue has not been addressed in the policy. Instead, the proposed policy laid out some abstract statement such as ‘eliminating discrimination against women and girl” (article 16.11).

Moreover, the proposed policy does not offer any means how to retain the tiny share that a woman is entitled to inhere from her parents. The current reality is that under implicit and explicit pressure as well as benign threat from their social milieu, women give up their property rights. Unfortunately, the issue was not treated with any importance in the proposed policy. Rather, it was jumbled up with other topics under the article 25.2.

Despite its serious drawback, the proposed policy is under fire from the so-called Islamists who seek to situate their concern within religion-oriented context. Yet, there is no single statement in the policy that is contrary to the faith.

Unfortunately, two innocent young lives have been lost in the process of protest that was instigated by some of the fanatics. Yet, the so-called Mufti’s madrassa-based party (IOJ) and other similar organisations appear hell-bent on their pledge to reuse young children to force government to reconsider the policy.

Essentially, what certain mullahs want is more restriction for women so that they could repress them even more. What is surprising is the timidity of the government to tackle these forces, as if their threat is real. The government must take firm action against these zealots not only to continue the current course of formulation of the policy but also to take initiative to reform all other laws (especially Muslim Family Law) that discriminate against women. Especially, the effort of the so-called Islamists should be seen as subversive to the state since their claim is against the constitution.

If the issue is so politically sensitive, the government should arrange 70 million women to speak for themselves. Women would have their say in deciding their fate, not these zealots. The government must remember that a few thousand maddrassa students and their ‘cheer-leaders’ cannot decide the fate of 70 million women.

————————————

Hasan Reza holds a faculty position at Shah Jalal University of Science and Technology, Sylhet and is currently pursuing his doctoral studies in The University of Chicago, USA.