Main Page «
Front Page «
Metro «
Business «
International «
Sports «
National «
Editorial «
Home «
Timeout «
Letters «

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

The intention of the caretaker government to prepare voter ID cards for ensuring a transparent and fair election process has generally been appreciated by the people. But I take a cautious and sceptical view about the desired outcome of such an initiative, if the associated governance process and mechanisms are not developed side by side or given a thorough consideration.
   The ad hoc arrangement of voter ID card and more particularly the national ID card will fail to deliver its proper value if it is not planned keeping pace with the national ICT infrastructure and national strategy in adopting ICT in the mainstream of the government. Before this major decision is taken, a detailed evaluation and study must be carried out on its deliverable results in terms of cost, time, public acceptance and, most importantly, range of risks involved in the context of Bangladesh and its current environment. In addition to initial cost and investment problem, these risks include: a) the problem of data gathering and data organising as there is no national data base in place in correct order; b) the relevance of the card for a large number of the population who are illiterate and live under the poverty line; c) the copyright law being not very effective the security of ID cards will be at stake; d) with cheap technologies being available counterfeit ID cards will be in abundance; e) proper and costly mechanism is needed to ensure the validity of the ID cards with digital key/barcode and this may not be feasible for all the places/polling stations in Bangladesh; f) loss prevention and replacement of cards will pose a huge problem. A billion-dollar loss has already been incurred in an earlier ID card project and the undertaking another ID card project will be a big risk unless these factors are seriously addressed.
   We should never think the voter ID card is a magical tool to make the election process smooth and transparent. Moreover, for any innovation to succeed there are some preconditions. A hastily made project will rather involve additional cost and create controversies at the end, if it fails to deliver the desired result. About a decade ago, the Election Commission initiated the Voter ID Card Project at a cost of Tk 1.78 billion. It is also reported that almost 76 per cent of the then voters were issued with ID cards. But the project was finally abandoned in June 2000 on various allegations of corruption and on information that fake voters had received ID cards. So this time, before taking up the new venture, a detailed post-evaluation (not just for the sake of a report) should be carried out if this is has not already been done. The problems the earlier project faced should be addressed and its recommendations considered. After that a detailed cost/benefit analysis should be carried out. Besides, all focus should not be on the voter ID card as the panacea and alternatives should be explored and weighted against it if other ways and means can bring equal amount of value at the end or can ensure transparency in the voting process.
   The introduction of the voter ID card is a debatable issue even in the developed countries like the USA. For example, if someone wants to vote by absentee ballot (which both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party encourage voters to do) it is pointless to have a voter ID card. National ID card, on the other hand, may be a good idea if it serves multipurpose needs like Malaysia’s ‘My card’. A national ID card these days comes with a computer chip containing name, place of birth, date of birth and gender of the bearer along with a serial number. Other possible information would be physical attributes such as height, eye colour or additional information like current address, a sample signature etc. Many developing courtiers are now considering introduction of the national ID card, mainly to address threats like terrorism and illegal immigration. Till now many developed countries like Canada and Australia could not introduce national ID card or voter ID card for various reasons like privacy protection, identity theft and personal choice and so on. Another controversial issue is the possibility of including biometric data such as a fingerprint or retinal pattern, in the card. However, those countries ensured transparency in voting through other mechanisms, not necessarily the ID card.
   Also, without building the national IT infrastructure, enacting the relevant law, adopting ICT in the national strategy and planning, making only a voter ID card may appear something like making a car steering without its engine. It is an integrated process. To derive the maximum value and manage the entire voting process efficiently a national database is required to complete the automated process. An eRevolution in the society is also needed to make such a venture a success where the society needs to be prepared to embrace it. Unfortunately none of the governments in the past was serious in introducing ICT in the national agenda, where it could be used as an important strategic tool for economic growth and also to address the deep-rooted problems in public sector administration like transparency, accountability and corruption. ICT should no longer be seen simply as the back office number cruncher, rather it has become the organisational brain and nervous system of the modern world.
   It is encouraging to find that the caretaker government is showing seriousness in combating corruption, but it remains to be seen how successful they will be in the anti-corruption drive. For a long-term treatment of this disease, eGovernance can be the most powerful and effective tool along with some other measures. A serious involvement and strategy is required in this regard to automate the legal system, change the business process and to bring necessary reforms in the administration and law.
   Bangladesh is struggling in the digital race and research findings show it is particularly lagging in eGovernance because of lack of knowledge and awareness, lack of vision, political will, committed leadership and overall mindset. Regrettably, research and innovation receives a low priority in most of the pre- and post-evaluation of projects. But for a poor country like Bangladesh the need for such research and investigation is far more important than in the West, as every penny is valuable for us and we simply can’t afford to waste money in the name of project and experiment without its proper evaluation, feasibility study and calculation of RoI (Return of Investment).
   So going into a big venture like voter ID card with a population of 135 million will be viable and acceptable only when all other associated issues are taken well care of and advantages and disadvantages are carefully examined. We believe that simply producing a political stunt is not the intention of the present caretaker government. A more holistic, meticulous and viable approach is as such expected from them before embarking into this venture.
   Ahmed Imran is a PhD candidate in Information System at the Australian National University. He can be reached at: a.imran@acslink.net.au

SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 24: Peace activists from around the United States will converge on Washington Saturday for what organisers hope will be the largest demonstration to date against the Iraq war.
   ‘We expect a turnout in the six figures,’ said Tom Andrews, a former Democratic congressman who now runs the group Win Without War, which is organising the march along with True Majority, Working Assets, the RainbowPUSH Coalition, the National Organisation for Women and the national umbrella group United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ).
   UFPJ’s Leslie Cagan told IPS that the level of energy in the antiwar movement has spiked since the November election, when voters ended Republican majorities in both houses of Congress.
   ‘The voters of this country figured out that they could use the November elections as a vehicle to voice their opposition to the war,’ Cagan said. ‘What happened there was that the voters gave Congress a mandate to end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home.’
   That success at the polls gave antiwar citizens more optimism that a large demonstration might make an impact, she said.
   In mid-November, United for Peace and Justice called a demonstration for the nation’s capital for Jan. 27, with other large mobilisations planned for Los Angeles, Seattle and San Francisco.
   In addition, smaller actions are planned for more than 50 cities. In Bismark, North Dakota, the group Surge for Peace will be delivering petitions to members of the local congressional delegation. In Austin, Texas, the Stop the War coalition is hosting a march and rally featuring student activists, Green Party activists, and members of the group Veterans for Peace.
   ‘People started saying to us right after the election ‘well, what is Congress going to do?’ Cagan said. ‘And we quickly realised the real question is ‘what are we going to do to push this Congress to do what they said they were going to do to get elected’. So we figured we got to get people into Washington as soon as possible after the new session of Congress began.’
   Organisers said five or six Democratic lawmakers are expected to speak at the rally in Washington, and that Representative Barbara Lee will speak at the Los Angeles gathering.
   ‘A lot more would be speaking but we simply don’t have the time on stage,’ said former congressman Andrews. ‘If we had all day and there was unlimited time for members of Congress to speak we’d have many members of Congress.’
   Peace activists will have to fight hard if they want to end the war. In recent weeks, President George W Bush has proposed escalating the war by sending 21,500 additional US soldiers to Iraq. At least 3,000 troops are already on their way.
   In his annual State of the Union address Tuesday night, Bush told a joint session of Congress he ‘chose this course of action because it provides the best chance of success.’
   ‘Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq, because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far-reaching,’ he added.
   While lawmakers from both political parties have put forward proposals condemning Bush’s plan to escalate the war, none are binding.
   In addition, the new speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, along with senate majority leader Harry Reid, has already said they don’t support efforts to cut funding for the war.
   In the official Democratic response to Bush’s state of the union address, freshman Senator Jim Webb of Virginia focused more on strategy and tactics than the merits of the war itself.
   ‘We need a new direction,’ said Webb, whose son is currently deployed as a soldier in Iraq. ‘The majority of the nation no longer supports the way this war is being fought, nor does the majority of our military.’
   In his speech, Sen. Webb favoured ‘regionally based diplomacy, a policy that takes our soldiers off the streets of Iraq’s cities, and a formula that will in short order allow our combat forces to leave Iraq.’
   But he also opposed a ‘withdrawal that ignores the possibility of further chaos.’
   United for Peace and Justice’s Leslie Cagan told IPS that the mixed message from the Democrats makes a large turnout at Saturday’s demonstration particularly important.
   ‘That’s why it’s critical to keep the pressure on,’ she said. ‘We are encouraging every single person who agrees with us who can possibly make the trip to Washington this coming weekend to be with us,’ adding that the antiwar movement is staging a lobby day on Capital Hill for Monday Jan. 29.
   ‘Now we know it’s a big country and everyone can’t make the trip,’ she added. ‘That’s why we’ve organised demonstrations for over 50 cities across the country including Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle.’
   Inter Press Service

THE stuff of gossip and fevered speculation over the last one year is now official. Pakistan’s commando-president, afraid of nothing and no one, is not going to risk the uncertainty of putting his candidature before any future parliament or assemblies. Preferring the certain over the uncertain, he will get himself ‘elected’ — the outcome being a foregone conclusion — from the present parliament and four provincial assemblies.
   The cabinet has been told this, the briefing on the subject given by the government’s in-house constitutional adviser, Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, who has been advising and facilitating Pakistan’s military saviours for the past forty years if not more. The military-facilitation club, by now Pakistan’s premier institution, has a distinguished membership. The Gauhars may write the memoirs of military saviours, Mr Pirzada fixes the constitutional ropes for them.
   The president will get himself ‘elected’ this autumn, in Sep/Oct, while general elections, reduced to a farce and a foregone win for the ruling party, will take place two/three months later. The people of Pakistan, all too familiar with such jokes, have been given this good news by the information minister, Muhammad Ali Durrani, who comes up with the most amazing things in the softest tones, always a smile playing on his lips even as his eyes remain unsmiling.
   This is a cabinet of smooth performers. Durrani’s deputy, Tariq Azeem, has a sly sense of humour and doesn’t lose his cool. Shaukat Aziz, the prime minister, can say things with the utmost conviction without meaning anything. Sher Afgan Niazi is in a class by himself. So the list goes on. Indeed, this is more a vaudeville show than cabinet, no braver face ever put on the absence of real power.
   The ultimate performer of course is Gen Musharraf himself although no one can accuse him of not having power. Able to hold forth endlessly, whatever the occasion, with the greatest of ease, he is never at a loss for words even if at times it is hard to figure out what exactly he is trying to say.
   Take his position on Kashmir on which he has held forth, and at length, on numerous occasions. All that can be said with certainty is that the sting has been taken out of our stand on Kashmir, tellingly attested to by the fact that Indian officials dealing with such matters can’t seem to wipe the satisfaction from their faces.
   But what exactly his various proposals amount to, this is not always easy to understand.
   In his book ‘In The Line of Fire’ — hugely acclaimed when it came out but now, alas, making its way to the sidewalks where second-hand books are sold, a boon for those who can’t afford the high price of new books in Pakistan — the president says he acquired his gift for public speaking when he was at the Command and Staff College, Quetta. The Staff College, I suppose, has something to answer for.
   But returning to the presidential election, the future now stands revealed in all its glory. As probably their last act before expiring, the present assemblies will ‘elect’ the president for another five-year term who, for the higher defence of the Republic, will of course remain in uniform.
   No one suffers from any confusion on this score, least of all the
   president who knows where his true interests lie.
   Commando-president-in-uniform (a mouthful this) will then preside over the general elections (of course free and fair). Foretold, predetermined and gift-wrapped: who says there is no stability in Pakistan? Other countries make a mess of their democracy — look at Bangladesh which, once a part of us, has taken to democracy for no fault of ours. We have turned tinpot dictatorship — tinpot essence being one
   of its few saving graces—into a subtle thing.
   Our destiny seems pretty obvious: Hosni Mobarakisation, on the lines of President Hosni Mobarak of Egypt
   who has been in power since 1981. Perhaps the most alarming
   feature of the Pakistani political scene is the commando-president’s robust health.
   Barring the unexpected, we can count ourselves lucky for having him around for many years to come.
   But Mobarakisation in Egypt and elsewhere in the Muslim world — for most Muslim countries, no doubt because of some genetic oddity in their history, are dedicated to some form or the other of this phenomenon — comes with belly-dancing and being able to walk along the Nile hand-in-hand with someone you happen to like (or someone available, both things not always the same): that is to say, without the moral strictures which crowd our social landscape.
   The rigours of Soviet communism were made easier with vodka, the endless sands of Mobarakisation made easier with belly-dancing (this of course a metaphor for social freedom). Even in Burma (Myanmar) you can have fun (I understand, plenty of it). Successful dictatorships rest on a simple social contract: have fun, just don’t ask awkward questions. Iraq was a fun place under Saddam as long as the awkward was avoided.
   In Pakistan we have developed a unique form of Mobarakisation, no cakes and ale except for the rich — chief minister Pervaiz Elahi’s Lahore marathon being our idea of yearly fun — but earfuls of sermons and hypocrisy. Who are the standard-bearers of the existing order? Pervaiz Elahi, Shujat Hussain and the vaudeville cabaret masquerading as the federal cabinet. Give us a break. Who’s on the other side
   of the hill? Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Maulana Fazlur Rehman. Lord have mercy on us.
   Anyway, the general-president (what other kind do we see in Pakistan?)
   has revealed his cards or, more
   accurately, thrown down the gauntlet. What are the opposition parties — principally Bhutto’s PPP and Sharif’s
   PML-N — likely to do? Pick it up or walk away?
   Sofa Bolsheviks (like me) will hope for the best but, I suspect, will have to settle for the worst.
   There is no stomach for a fight among the opposition parties. They will hem and haw and issue tough statements — pastimes at which they are past masters — but when the time comes just settle for the path of least resistance.
   Struggle in any real sense of the word is no part of our collective inheritance. Coming to terms with authority has gone on for so long
   that it has become an ingrained
   habit.
   Imran Khan sounds as if he is on the warpath. But his is a voice in the wilderness (although the cynically-inclined still find it hard to get over the fact that until the glorious referendum of 2002 in which angels voted, he likened Musharraf’s seizure of power to the second coming).
   The PML-N would do everything it can to bring the present system
   down. But while it enjoys the luxury of fantasising, it can’t do much by
   itself.
   The PPP holds the key to forming a united democratic front. If it is willing, other parties can come around. But there are straws in the wind to suggest that it is keen for some kind of accommodation with the regime.
   Benazir Bhutto and Asif Zardari have been out in the cold for too long.
   Given Pakistan’s less-than-revolutionary political milieu, it is probably
   natural for them to want to
   come in.
   The maulanas, amongst the canniest operators on the political scene, are anyone’s guess. They blow the hottest of all when the mood seizes them but at every crucial turning they act in a very calculated manner.
   Under Musharraf’s quasi-dictatorship they have prospered like never before. They are not fools to risk all this by a leap into the unknown, Maulana Fazlur Rehman for one not the kind of person to make an issue of how the general-president gets himself
   ‘elected’.
   There is plenty of dissatisfaction across the country with the present scheme of things but none of the
   bitter polarisation as existed between Bhutto and anti-Bhutto forces
   in 1977.
   After seven years and a virtual cult of verbosity, Musharraf inspires boredom (and plenty of it).
   He still does not inspire hatred — the visceral hatred which brings people to the streets and drives them to pull everything down. Apart from the army’s divisions, this may be his biggest strength.
   Give him credit though for not opting for the surreptitious. A full ten months in advance he is letting the nation know what his plans are,
   which is tough on the political parties which will be in no position to say they had no time to devise a counter-strategy.

Government should stay as
long as it needs to

I wholeheartedly support this statement by the advisers. In the few days that they have been at the helm of the government, we have seen many wrongs undone and many rights expedited. I would totally support them staying on for as long it takes to clean up the mess created by the successive governments of Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina.
   Both the BNP and the AL have reacted sharply to Prof Yunus’s statement about Bangladeshi politicians being in politics only for the money. Instead of lambasting the Nobel laureate, Messrs Jalil and Bhuiyan, why don’t you start by publishing the rise/fall of your personal wealth and those of your family members before and after you have been ministers and let the public decide whether Dr Yunus was wrong or right? Why has a close associate of the former PM’s son taken refuge in a foreign country?
   Shabbir A Bashar, PhD
   Vancouver, USA

---