MPs have none but themselves to blame

Heaping blame on the bureaucrats by the MPs in a wholesale manner in the current parliamentary session for getting elbowed aside in running state affairs did not come as a surprise. It is obvious that the elected peoples' representatives are feeling neglected in statecraft but this peculiar turn of events has reasons in their own actions, or inactions, unfortunately.

It is not that the success of the bureaucrats came from their efficiency in running the administration, but rather it is because of the inefficiency of the MPs in discharging their duties which allowed the bureaucracy to gain the upper hand easily. The other major reason is abusing the bureaucracy for partisan political gains.

Constitutionally, the cabinet [call it the government] is collectively accountable to the Parliament. Meaning, the parliamentarians can hold the people – be it a minister or a bureaucrat – accountable for each of their actions to run the administration.

To exercise that authority, there is an inbuilt parliamentary mechanism for MPs. The committee system lies in the heart of the mechanism. None, but the MPs are heads of the committees dominated by MPs also. A minister is a member of the 10-member committee on his/her ministry.

The Constitution empowers the committees to investigate any alleged anomalies in the functions of the ministries or any departments under the ministries and recommend corrective measures.  

The all-important question is that, do they use the mechanism to exercise that authority the constitution empowers them with? The answer is NO.

Take the parliamentary standing committee on the health ministry, for example.

Since its formation in early 2019, it was bound by the rules of the procedure of Parliament to hold at least one meeting a month. But it held only nine meetings in the last two and a half years whereas it was supposed to hold two dozen meetings.

Since the outbreak of the pandemic last year, health care has been overwhelmed. Inefficiency of the health ministry in implementing development projects appears to be shocking. Media reports indicate rampant graft and anomalies in the health sector.

Being a watchdog, the parliamentary standing committee on the health ministry has done little worth mentioning. So when MPs vent their anger that they are not engaged in fighting the pandemic, it sounds hollow.

Take another example.

Every year the government has made the Parliament pass the supplementary budget without sending it to the public accounts committee for examination of the reasons behind excess expenditure by any ministry and failure to spend money allocated for a particular project. The rules of procedure of the Jatiya Sangsad empowers the public accounts committee to do the job. Although the committee has never been allowed to exercise the authority, it has remained quiet so far.  

Performance of other standing committees are no different. Most of them do not hold regular meetings, let alone investigating anomalies or failures in the functions of the administration.

When MPs do not make the committees functional, bureaucrats remain beyond the purview of scrutiny. Exercise of powers without being accountable to anybody makes things worse. Who are responsible for this: the bureaucrats or the MPs?

When the Parliament is in session, most MPs who join the discussions do not present constructive suggestions. Most ruling party MPs spend most of the time either praising the government or castigating the opposition or critics of the government.

They contribute little to the law making process. So, most of the bills are passed without careful examination and debate.

MPs are constitutionally empowered to review the enforcement of the laws made by the Parliament and make recommendations to bring necessary amendments to the laws. But it is difficult to find an example that any of the four dozen parliamentary committees has ever exercised their constitutional power.

Inactions by MPs appear to be a blessing for the cabinet and the bureaucrats. In this process, MPs have been sidelined. In fact, they are the ones to be blamed for today's situation.

The other major reason as mentioned above is abusing the bureaucracy for political gains.

The controversial role the administration played in the last two general elections in 2014 and 2018 respectively can be noted. That controversial role reportedly helped some to get elected. When you bank on the bureaucracy to win the election, bureaucrats get extra-mileage to establish their supremacy over the administrative affairs of the state. And you have little moral authority to hold them accountable for each of their actions. Bureaucrats have used the scope to strengthen their grips over the administration.

Do not forget the story of the Janatar Mancha. Deserting the then government in 1996 bureaucrats joined the platform and extended their support to the agitating opposition parties to topple the then government.

So, before lashing out against the bureaucrats, MPs need to do a soul-searching first to find the answer to what has made the government become excessively dependent on bureaucrats.