1. The document discusses the history and need for a caretaker government system in Bangladesh. Political parties historically manipulated elections to maintain power, undermining trust in the democratic process. 2. A caretaker government system was introduced in 1991, comprised of non-partisan figures to oversee elections impartially. Four elections were held under this system until it was scrapped by the ruling party in 2014. 3. There is now public controversy over scrapping the system, with concerns that it could lead to political instability and confrontation between parties. The document aims to survey public opinion on the issue.

1. Chapter-1
1. Title
Public opinion survey about caretaker government
system
2. Introduction
The politics of Bangladesh is characterized by confrontation, lack of mutual
trust and understanding. They can’t believe one another. Hence As a result of
a political confrontation that landed country into a deadlock, the care taker
government system had been introduced in the country for the first time in
1991. But before the national election in 1996, then BNP government
undertook a constitutional change known as the twentieth amendment to
incorporate the system in the charter in the face of a simultaneous movement
launched by all the oppositions of the country.
From 1991 to 2008, overall four elections have been held under this system.
After each election, the winner quarter has termed the election as free, fair
and neutral one. On the contrary, the defeated quarter as usual has smelt the
fragrance of shuttle or massive rigging round it.
In the course of time, the present AL led mega coalition government has
scraped the system on the pretext of a court verdict. Though the court kept
scope to prevail the system for more two elections in its verdict,
The government’s one-sided decision on this issue sparks a controversy in the
political arena of the country. The arbitrary decision to repeal the system, for
which once all the parties worked in a body, has drawn a flak and
acclamation of the people from all walks of life. This kind of authoritarian
decision enforces the countrymen to become divided. The countrymen are
seen to make opposed to each other statement about the issue.
Being compelled by the present circumstances, an eagerness to know the
public opinion on the issue has aroused in our minds as an aware citizen like
others. From this very thinking we have decided to undertake a survey on this
issue.

2. 3. Statement of the problem
`We have considered the issue as a fatal and burning one taking the present
situation into account. Because all the political parties active in the country
have already taken their one stance on the issue. All the sides have become
spilt over the matter. In such a situation, analysts are apprehending a deadly
confrontation that may drive the country into uncertainty in coming days.
This may impede our democracy that is still budding. The confrontation can
inspire the generals to take over the power too. It can incur alien powers to
interfere about our internal matters and even invasion on our motherland. In a
word, the experts are anticipating a condensed dark cloud on the sky of
politics. That’s why we have conduct study on it.
4. Brief review of literature
We could not find any comprehensive study that conducted in the past.
However, some online polls conducted by different daily have come into our
sights. But these are not in fact survey in term of convention. A lot of
shortcomings we have found in them. That’s why we don’t take these one
into consideration.
A part from them, there would/could be some personal survey to that we
couldn’t reach for a lot of limitations ad barriers.
On the other hand, we have found some books and articles published in
different news papers and magazines on various occasion at home and
abroad. Based on them, we have made a conclusive extraction on the matter
that the care taker government system has been developed by the politicians
and introduced in our country in consequence of political confrontation
which ensured a situation and atmosphere of infidelity among them. In this
term, our politicians are the pioneers of the system in the world.
5. Objectives

3. There have a lot of objective of our study but there are some specific
two objectives on which we have based to conducting our tasks. These
are as follows.
1. We would like to find out real public opinion on this issue.
2. Also we want to make a recommendation based on our study results so
that the country can avoid a severe confrontation.
6. Question
1. What do people think about the care taker government?
7. Hypothesis
In order to administer the survey in line with the purpose we have to have
made some assumptions that are better known as hypothesis of the study.
These are given below.
1. Majority people know about the system.
2. Maximum people are known about government decision to scrap the
system
3. People enjoying majority in numbers are well known about controversy
around it.
4. Confrontation can be avoided respecting public opinions.

4. 8. Theoretical framework
In the discussion of the theoritical framework of the caretaker
government, we can say that this system has been developped and
introduced based on doctrine of necessity that is much discussed among
our society for many reasons. But this doctrine has taken institutional
recognation and legality from the theory of political freedom of what
the main extraction is the politician can do any thing taking support
from the countrymen. It is atheory which work under democratic
system.
This theory has give rights to politician to take any kind of decision
taking the greater interest of the nation into account.
9. Methodology
We have decided to use survey method in order to conduct our study, because
our study itself is one kind of survey. That’s why we have prepared a survey
questionnaire that has incorporated with appendices of this proposal.
On the other hand, as the care taker government had been introduced as a
result of a historical movement and it has enjoyed a historical journey, we
have decided to apply the historical method in our study.
10. Limitation of study
We had to face some limitations when we went to study.

5. 1. We are absolute young in the field of such research and inexperienced.
2. We had to depend on daily news paper for some data where access is
difficult to find out data.
3. Some of our respondents gave their opinion influencing by a particular
political party which could the research vulnerable to bias.
Chapter-2
Introduction to Caretaker Government
Like many developing countries in Bangladesh the holding of free, fair and
credible elections remains a big legal and political challenge despite the
existence of all formal institutions including an apparent independent
Election Commission. Those in power have always manipulated the rules and
institutions concerned with the election process.
The political parties in our country always try to sustain their power. For this
purpose they always try to influence the national election and manipulate it.
Consequently distrust, disgrace has grown among the political leader. There
is no existence of gracious, tolerance and democratic behavior among them
which pull them to a confrontation politics that leave the country violated
unrest, political instability and many lives dead. Hence the main concern of
the political parties is to gain the power rather than accepting democratic
behavior. So the political governments always keep themselves busy in
manipulating the election commission and other democratic institutions to
grab the power. So it has become the demand of time and country’s mass

6. people to find out a system which offer a free fair and natural election that
will be acceptable to all. Consequently, the innovative idea of holding the
election under a non-party caretaker government was conceived as a solution.
It was perceived that the non-party neutral caretaker government would have
no motivation to manipulate the electoral process as the members of this
government are barred from contesting the election.
What’s Caretaker Government?
Caretaker Government is kinds of government system composed of a definite
number of people who are called advisor headed by one among them who is
called chief advisor take the responsibilities to care the countries during an
interim period until the new regular government formed. Their main
responsibility is to assist the Election commission in order to conduct a free
faire and a credible national election not taking any policy initiative which
may influence election result. When a regular government steps down due to
completion of its regime or breaking down the parliament for any reason, it
transfer the state power to the Caretaker Government for an interim period
specially 90 days (3 months) and the Caretaker Government will continue its
regime until it hand over the power to next regular government.
• Bangla pedia offers this definition of Caretaker
Government.
In the parlance of institutional government, a caretaker government is
one which normally takes care of state administration for an interim period
until the regular new government is formed. In established parliamentary
system, there is a convention of transformation of the outgoing government
into a caretaker government for the time being before the holding of general
election. Such temporary government exists only to perform day to day
administrative jobs, and is not supposed to deal with policy initiating
functions which may influence the election results. During the period the
caretaker government maintains neutral status for ensuring free and fair
general elections. In the parliamentary framework, after the dissolution of

7. one ministry, the practice of establishing caretaker government for organizing
general polls has been observed in all democratic countries.
According to Wikipidia :
The Caretaker Government is a form of government system in which
the country is ruled by a selected government for an interim period during
transition from one government to another, after the completion tenure of the
former. As the outgoing government hands over their power, the Caretaker
Government comes into place. Members of the caretaker government do not
belong to any political party; nor are they allowed to contest the elections.
The main objective of the caretaker government is to create an environment
in which an election can be held in a free and fair manner without any
political influence of the outgoing government. It is not empowered to take
any policy decisions unless it is necessary. The head of the Caretaker
government is called the Chief Adviser and is selected by the President, and
the Chief Adviser selects the other advisers. The administration is generally
distributed between the advisers. The Chief Adviser and the other advisers
are committed for their activities to the President.
• The caretaker government system has been installed in our
constitution by 13th amendment.
The Constitution (Thirteenth Amendment) Act 1996 was
passed on 26 March 1996. It provided for a non-party Caretaker government
which, acting as an interim government, would give all possible aid and
assistance to the Election Commission for holding the general election of
members of the Jatiya Sangsad peacefully, fairly and impartially. The non-
party caretaker government, comprising the Chief Adviser and not more than
10 other advisers, would be collectively responsible to the president and
would stand dissolved on the date on which the prime minister entered upon
his office after the constitution of the new Sangsad.
• Our constitution includes its definition and its whole
structure in the article number of 58.

8. From the Constitution;
58B. Non-Party Care-taker Government
(1) There shall be a Non-Party Care-taker Government during the
period from the date on which the Chief Adviser of such government
enters upon office after Parliament is dissolved or stands dissolved by
reason of expiration of its term till the date on which a new Prime
Minister enters upon his office after the constitution of Parliament.
(2) The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall be collectively
responsible to the President.
(3) The executive power of the Republic shall, during the period
mentioned in clause (1), be exercised, subject to the provisions of
article 58D(1), in accordance with this Constitution, by or on the
authority of the Chief Adviser and shall be exercised by him in
accordance with the advice of the Non-Party Care-taker Government.
(4) The provisions of article 55(4), (5) and (6) shall (with the necessary
adaptations) apply to similar matters during the period mentioned in
clause (1).
58C. Composition of the Non-Party Care-taker Government,
appointment of Advisers, etc.
(1) Non-Party Care-taker Government shall consist of the Chief
Adviser at its head and not more than ten other Advisors, all of whom
shall be appointed by the President.
(2) The Chief Adviser and other Advisers shall be appointed within
fifteen days after Parliament is dissolved or stands dissolved, and
during the period between the date on which Parliament is dissolved or
stands dissolved and the date on which the Chief Adviser is appointed,
the Prime Minister and his cabinet who were in office immediately
before Parliament was dissolved or stood dissolved shall continue to
hold office as such.
(3) The President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person who among
the retired Chief Justices of Bangladesh retired last and who is qualified
to be appointed as an Adviser under this article:
Provided that if such retired Chief Justice is not available or is
not willing to hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall
appoint as Chief Adviser the person who among the retired Chief
Justices of Bangladesh retired next before the last retired Chief
Justice.

9. (4) If no retired Chief Justice is available or willing to hold the office of
Chief Advise, the President shall appoint as Chief Adviser the person
who among the retired Judges of the Appellate Division retired last and
who is qualified to be appointed as an Adviser under this article:
Provided that if such retired Judge is not available or is not willing to
hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall appoint as Chief
Adviser the person who among the retired Judges of the Appellate
Division retired next before the last such retired Judge.
(5) If no retired judge of the Appellate Division is available or willing
to hold the office of Chief Adviser, the President shall, after
consultation, as far as practicable, with the major political parties,
appoint the Chief Adviser from among citizens of Bangladesh who are
qualified to be appointed as Advisers under this article.
(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, if the
provisions of clauses (3), (4) and (5) cannot be given effect to, the
President shall assume the functions of the Chief Adviser of the Non-
Party Care-taker Government in addition to his own functions under
this Constitution.
(7) The President shall appoint Advisers from among the persons who
are-
1. qualified for election as members of parliament;
2. not members of any political party or of any organisation
associated with or affiliated to any political party;
3. not, and have agreed in writing not to be, candidates for the
ensuing election of members of parliament;
4. not over seventy-two years of age.
(8) The Advisers shall be appointed by the President on the advice of
the Chief Adviser.
(9) The Chief Adviser or an Adviser may resign his office by writing
under his hand addressed to the President.
(10) The Chief Adviser or an Adviser shall cease to be Chief Adviser or
Adviser if he is disqualified to be appointed as such under this article.
(11) The Chief Adviser shall have the status, and shall be entitled to the
remuneration and privileges, of a Prime Minister and an Adviser shall
have the status, and shall be entitled to the remuneration and privileges,
of a Minister.

10. (12) The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall stand dissolved on
the date on which the prime Minister enters upon his office after the
constitution of new parliament.
58D. Functions of Non-Party Care-taker Government
(1) The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall discharge its functions
as an interim government and shall carry on the routine functions of
such government with the aid and assistance of persons in the services
of the Republic; and, except in the case of necessity for the discharge of
such functions its shall not make any policy decision.
(2) The Non-Party Care-taker Government shall give to the Election
Commission all possible aid and assistance that may be required for
bolding the general election of members of parliament peacefully,
fairly and impartially.
58E. Certain provisions of the Constitution to remain ineffective
Notwithstanding anything contained in articles 48(3), 141A(1) and
141C(1) of the Constitution, during the period the Non-Party Care-
taker government is functioning, provisions in the constitution
requiring the President to act on the advice of the Prime Minister or
upon his prior counter-signature shall be ineffective.
Historical background of Caretaker government
In Bangladesh the demand for neutral caretaker government largely
originated from a lack of general agreement among the competing parties to
maintain legitimate means of changing government and uphold unbiased
election system. During the pre-independence days, the elections of 1954 and
1970 were widely acclaimed as fair polls having significant impact on the
people's movements which ultimately led to the emergence of sovereign
Bangladesh in 1971.
The erosion of our national election has begun after the independence. In
1973 a national election held and some influential ministers defeated in this
election. A few days latter the election commission of that time (1972-77)
according to government decision declared some winner candidate as

11. defeated and defeating candidates as winner. It’s the beginning point of
election manipulation. After this the politics of snatching ballot box,
occupying the vote center, direct interface of political government on election
commission begins to grab the power. These manipulations also continue in
the election of DAKSU and RAKSU. As result the election commission and
other democratic institutions gradually become weak and inactive. For
example in the presidential election of 1978 the election commission of that
time (1976-85) was seen inactive and helpless. It could not play a vital role to
conduct a free faire and credible election. In the election of 1986 the Ershad
government snatched the result by interfering the election avoiding the
election commission of (1985-1990).
Then the demand for caretaker government was raised by the mainstream
opposition political parties with the immediate objective of removing Ershad
government from power and restoring democracy through fair polls.
Emergence of caretaker government
Before introducing parliamentary democracy
The first demand of caretaker government system comes into forward during
the rule of General Ershad. Restoration of democracy through fair polls was
ultimately transformed into a united anti-Ershad movement by the combined
opposition parties with a forceful demand for a neutral caretaker government.
Opposition formula for the formation of neutral caretaker government was
categorically mentioned in the 1990 Joint Declaration of the Three Party
Alliances. The Declaration specified inter alias that the political alliances
would participate in the elections only when conducted by a neutral non-
partisan caretaker government; but before that Ershad government would
have to be forced to resign and an interim caretaker government would be
formed; thereafter, Election commission would be reconstituted by the
caretaker government to hold free and fair election.
In the face of the anti-government public outburst and mass upsurge, General
Ershad had to yield to the movement. As such the framework for the
formation of caretaker government advanced when the Joint Declaration was

12. translated into reality on 6 December 1990 through the handing over state
power to the nominee of the combined opposition Justice Shahabuddin
ahmed the chief justice of Bangladesh. Earlier, the then Vice President
Moudud Ahmed resigned and Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed was installed as
the Vice President. Then General Ershad stepped down from the presidency
giving his charge to the Chief Justice emerging as the country's Acting
President and head of the neutral caretaker government. Subsequently, 17
Advisers of the caretaker government were appointed.
It may be mentioned that the neutral caretaker government of 1990 was
constituted without any prior to constitutional amendments. It was
understandable that there was indeed a difficulty in convening the existing
JATIYA SHANGSHAD owing to shortage of time. The caretaker
government of Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed, however, had the basis of
support from the general people and parties and thus the legality of its
activities was never questioned. All measures taken by the caretaker
government were thus subsequently ratified in 1991 by the popularly elected
Fifth Jatiya Sangsad.
After introducing parliamentary democracy
In 1991 the parliamentary government system has been restored by which the
Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) came to power. But only two years after
the reintroduction of parliamentary democracy, the issue of caretaker
government became the central theme of Bangladesh politics due to
disagreements on major national issues, mutual intolerance and lack of trust
among the competing parties.
The first demand of caretaker government came from the mainstream
opposition Bangladesh Awami league (AL) and it was empowered by its tow
main association party Jamaat-e-Islami and Jatiyo Party (JP). This was
visualized by three separate bills submitted by the Jamat-e- Islami, Awami
League and Jatiyo Party to the parliamentary secretariat in 1991, October
1993 and mid November 1993 respectively. The essence of these bills was
more or less similar, but differed on selection of the head of the caretaker
government. While Awami League was in favour of appointing the Chief
Justice as the head of the interim government, Jatiya Party proposed for
selecting a neutral person as the head of the caretaker government, and

13. Jamaat-e-Islami demanded for forming an advisory council headed by a
neutral person to be appointed by the president. They announced an
indifferent framework of Caretaker Government. This framework was
criticized severely by many other politicians. Even some politicians termed
this framework as suicide. But they remain stable in their intention and took
their stern position in the behalf of it. They conducted different kinds of
programs to extort their demand including hartal, barricade and engird and
occupying the street.
Formula of Niniyan stphen: Sir Niniyan Stephen the special consul of
General Secretary of common wealth of that time came to Dhaka with a view
to eliminating the existing political crisis and mediating among political
leaders. He sit in many dialogue with the politicians during month and
advocated for a new formula. This formula states that, an all party committee
will be formed that composed of 11 members to maintain the constitutional
continuance and conduct a credible election. The members include 5
parliament members from party, who is in power along with existing prime
minister, another 5 parliament members from opposition and rest 1 will be
nonparty and neutral person on which the responsibilities of important
ministries like establishment, state and information ministry will be rested.
But this formula was rejected and Niniyan was accused of biasness by the
oppositions.
At the end of 1994, 147 parliament member of 5th parliament from opposition
parties stepped down to dissolve the parliament. They submitted their resign
letter to the speaker.
1994, 95 and 96 in this three years the oppositions observed 70 days hartal,
barricade and 26 days non-cooperate program which left more than half
century death and more than thousand critically injured.
Amid the failure of Niniyan, massive opposition agitation and violence,
hartal and barricade through resignation of opposition MPs the 6th parliament
election was held in 15 February of 1996 by which the Bangladesh
Nationalist Party (BNP) came to power again. This election was abandoned
and rejected by the oppositions although the party in power claimed it
fairness and neutrality as this election was conducted in order to maintain the
constitutional continuance and protect the democracy.

14. The oppositions had been continuing their movement to achieve their demand
that push the country to an anarchic situation. In 21 march of 1996 the 6th
parliament went its 1st session where Caretaker Government affaires bill
raised. After a huge discussion in parliament the Caretaker Government
affaires bill passed in 26 march. Being approved by president in 28 march the
act of caretaker government and subsequently a caretaker government was
formed under the Thirteenth Amendment.
In 30 march the president dissolved the controversial 6th parliament and all
barriers went out from the path of forming a Caretaker Government body.
Finally at a night of 30 march of 1996 the retired chief justice Mohammad
Habibur Rahman take oath from president as the chief advisor of Caretaker
Government.
Short list of Non-party caretaker government in Bangladesh
A short list of Non-party caretaker government in Bangladesh from its
introduction until now is given bellow.
Caretaker Government of 1990
Although the caretaker government system introduced in 1996 with the
legitimacy of our constitution, a non party caretaker government was formed
to deal with the crisis which emerged while an agitated movement was
conducted to step down the Ershad government in 1990. This non party
government was headed by Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed. 5th parliament
election was held under this government. It may be mentioned that the neutral
caretaker government of 1990 was constituted without any prior
constitutional amendments. It was understandable that there was indeed a
difficulty in convening the existing Jatiyo Shanshod owing to shortage of
time.
Caretaker Government of 1996 Caretaker Government of 1996 was the
complete government body as our constitution suggest. As it was the starting
point of walking of caretaker government, a lot of controversies took place in

15. this stage. This body headed by Mohammad Habibur Rahman, entered its
office at 31 March 1996 and continued until 23 June 1996 when 7th
parliamentary election occurred and Bangladesh Awami league formed the
government.
Caretaker Government of 2001 Following the provision for caretaker
government through Thirteen Amendment of the Constitution the third
caretaker government was formed on 15 July 2001 and the former Chief
Justice, Justice Latifur Rahman, took over charge as the Chief Adviser. After
two days, ten Advisers of the caretaker government were sworn in. The
caretaker government discharged its prime duty of holding the eighth
parliamentary election on 1 October 2001, and continued in office till 10
October 2001 when the 8th parliament election was held and BNP lead four
party alliances came to power.
Caretaker Government from 2006-2008 The times from the end of 2006
to the end of 2008 is the crucial time of country’s politics. At the end of 2006
when the BNP lead four party alliances completed its duration it appointed
justice K M Hasan as chief advisor. On 20 October 2006, the 14-party
opposition alliance declared that it would launch massive street agitations,
indefinite strikes and blockades to protest against the handover of power to
Justice K M Hasan after the completion of the government’s five-year term
of office. On 27 October, Justice K M Hasan indicated his unwillingness to
be appointed as chief adviser. On 29 October 2006, the government
completed its five-year tenure and resigned. The parliament was also
dissolved on its expiration of tenure. Without exhausting other options
available under the Thirteenth Amendment Act 1996, the President assumed
the office himself. So he was the President and, at the same time, also the
Chief Adviser (Prime Minister). Thus, the very purpose of the Thirteenth
Amendment to establish a neutral non-party caretaker government to hold a
free, fair and credible election was defeated, with the titular President, being
a nominee of the previous political government, assuming the role of the real
head of the caretaker government. The assumption of the role of prime
minister by the titular President, combining the two roles, was also against
the principles of parliamentary democracy and, as such, was also against the
basic structure of the Constitution. Iajuddin Ahmed started his office at 29
October 2006 and continued to 11 January 2007, although Fazlul Haque was
appointed as acting chief advisor for only one day i.e. from 11 January 2007

16. to 12 January 2007. In 12 January 2007 Fakhruddin Aahmed along with his
advisor took oath from the president.
List of Chief Advisers of Bangladesh
Name Entered office Left office
01 Mohammad Habibur Rahman 31 March 1996 23 June 1996
02 Latifur Rahman 15 July 2001 10 October 2001
03 Iajuddin Ahmed 29 October 2006 11 January 2007
04 Fazlul Haque (acting) 11 January 2007 12 January 2007
05 Fakhruddin Ahmed 12 January 2007 6 January 2009
Chapter3
Debate on Caretaker government
The controversy and confusion over caretaker government at first rose during
an incident named by 1/11 which is termed as “Black day” in the field
politics although this day was welcomed by the mass people. Amid this day a
military backed caretaker government body headed by Fokruddin ahmed took
the state power. This was the 2nd military controlled government in history of
Bangladesh. The 1st was the government of Khondoker Moshtaq immediate
after of independence. The Caretaker government of Fakhruddin Ahmed was
a military controlled and has made extensive use of the military to stymie the
chaos that proceeded the 11th of January, 2007 (popularly known as 1/11).
Many leaders of the political parties accused of corruption along with two
chairpersons of two grand parties were sent to prisons which was unthinkable
to the people. This Fokruddin government empowered by the military headed
by Army chief of that time Moinuddin Ahmed continued its office until the
9th parliament election held at the end of 2008 when Awami lead 14 parties
mega alliance formed the government. Although it was supposed that this
Caretaker government would conduct a free fair and neutral national election
in 90 days according to the constitution but it expanded its tenure about 2

17. years avoiding the constitution. This military controlled unconstitutional
government made extensive military power to perform its business that was
beyond of his authority and obligation. This government brought many
reforms which could be able to gain the public’s welcome. There has been a
major change in the election system as the caretaker government has
introduced Voter ID cards (with photograph) for the first time. The
Bangladesh Army including members of other military forces were deployed
throughout the nation including the remotest areas. They were equipped with
laptops, and small digital camera in an effort that would result in the most
orderly voter's list in Bangladesh's history. The tenure of this caretaker
government however made a constitutional vacancy in the country. This
government also alleged that it tried to implement the” Minus 2” formula in
order to banish the two chairpersons of two grand parties. Hence, this
government performed the 9th parliament election where the 14 parties’
alliance swept away the monster number of sits, had been alleged of biasness
while the 4 party alliance gained a few numbers of sits of parliament. This
election was severely condemned by the Bangladesh Nationalist party as
many leader s of this party was restricted to take part in the election and
many others were captive in the prison. Even its chairperson had got released
a few days before of the election while the emergency situation was active
during the country.
At the beginning of 2009 Awami lead mega alliance came into power, as a
political culture of Bangladesh this government continually manipulated the
constitutional process by appointing people loyal to it and by designing the
institutions and laws to perpetuate the rules, it was alleged.
This government was alleged that it interfered on judiciary manipulating the
rules and laws to appoint the persons loyal to it on judiciary in the major vital
post.
After coming in power the mega alliance government has brought many
reforms in the constitution through the court. Cancellation of the provision of
Caretaker government is most important.
Declaration of court as Caretaker government illegal

18. In 10 may of 2011the high court of Bangladesh in its verdict has declared the
15 years old provision of Caretaker government that introduced in1996
trough 13th amendment of constitution which permits a regular government to
transfer power to an irregular body for an interim time in order to perform a
free fair and neutral election. The court also has verdict that this system may
be practiced in two parliamentary terms i.e. 2013 and 2018 for the sake of
"safety of the state and its people".
The court also asked the parliament to amend the constitution to make sure
that former chief justices or any other Supreme Court judges are not chosen
as heads of caretaker governments in case the system is kept for another two
parliamentary elections.
A seven-member SC panel, headed by Chief Justice ABM Khairul Haque,
reached the verdict on majority vote.
The court also rejected a 2004 High Court ruling that upheld the 13th
amendment to the constitution which provides for a 10-member non-partisan
caretaker government to take over following the dissolution of a parliament
and resignation of an elected government on completion of its term.
The High Court ruled the system legal after a Supreme Court lawyer M
Salimullah challenged the 13th amendment in January 2000 in a writ petition
saying the change distorts the principle that the republic will be governed by
an elected government.
After Salimullah's death, another Supreme Court lawyer Abdul Mannan Khan
filed an appeal in June 2005 against the High Court ruling in the Supreme
Court.
In its brief verdict yesterday the Supreme Court said, "The Constitution
(Thirteenth Amendment) Act, 1996 (Act 1 of 1996) is prospectively declared
void and ultra vires the Constitution.
The main points of this verdict are:-
 13th amendment unconstitutional

19.  Caretaker govt may hold next 2 JS polls for 'safety'
 Keep judges out of caretaker government
A report from press mentioned bellow
Bangladesh's apex court revokes caretaker government
system
Dhaka, May 10
An appellate division of the Supreme Court here today declared illegal
a constitutional amendment that introduced the system of holding
elections under caretaker governments in Bangladesh, but said the
next two polls ''might be'' held under the provision to avoid chaos.
The Supreme Court bench said the 13th amendment that introduced the
existing system of caretaker governments in 1996 was "ultra vires" or
"beyond the powers" of constitution.
"The constitutional (13th Amendment Act, 1996) Act is prospectively
declared void and ultra vires to the constitution," read verdict of the six-
member apex court division headed by chief justice A B M Khairul Haque
against a 2004 High Court judgement.
But, the verdict reached by majority of the six-member apex court bench,
said the next tenth and eleventh parliamentary elections set to held in 2013
and 2018 "might be" held under the existing caretaker government system to
evade chaotic situations.
The Appellate Division verdict said the majority of the judges reached the
decision in accepting the appeal filed by a now dead Supreme Court lawyer.
The High Court in a 2004 verdict rejected a writ by a Supreme Court lawyer
who sought scrapping of the 13th amendment, which said the country's
immediate past chief justice would preferably be head of the caretaker
government.

20. The provision prescribed installation of the non-party and non-elected
caretaker government for 90 days to oversee general elections at the end of
the tenure of an elected government.
The appellate division judgement allowed the next two general elections to be
held under the existing system following the "age old principles" that suggest
-- some otherwise unlawful things can be lawful because of necessity, "safety
of the people is the Supreme Law" and "safety of the state is the Supreme
Law".
"Parliament, however, in the meantime, is at liberty to bring necessary
amendments excluding the provisions of making former chief justices or
other former apex court judges as head of the caretaker government," the
judgement said.
The verdict came after 10 days of hearing when it heard opinions of eight
leading jurists as "amici curiae" or "friends of the court" with a majority of
them suggesting that the provision of appointing former chief justices
exposed the Supreme Court to a difficult situation in keeping the higher
judiciary beyond political controversies.
The Jatiya Sangsad had amended the constitution introducing the caretaker
government system in the country in 1996 after a protracted campaign by the
then main opposition Awami League of incumbent Prime Minister Sheikh
Hasina.
Awami League at that time feared that elections under the then ruling
Bangladesh Nationalist Party could be rigged under the influence of the
incumbent regime.
Mixed Reaction over repealing Caretaker government
The immediate reaction came from many politicians and political party. AL
and its alliance welcome this verdict. BNP and its allies took their extreme
opposition place against this verdict. The civil society of the country has

21. expressed their deep concern on it. Some reactions published in various press
mentioned bellowed.
Ruling AL, allies happy
Ruling Awami League-led grand alliance, politicians and AL minded
personality has welcomed the Supreme Court verdict that declared illegal the
constitutional provision for the caretaker government. They also has opined
on the against of this system.
Suranjit Sengupta, co-chairman of the parliamentary committee on
constitution amendment, said the caretaker government system can be a
temporary solution but cannot be the final solution in the parliamentary
democratic form of government. He also advocated the repeal of this system.
AL presidium member Obaidul Quader told in an immediate reaction
yesterday that "We definitely welcome the apex court decision,"
The caretaker government system was introduced to meet a special need and
it cannot be a permanent solution, Quader said. Both the AL and BNP should
reach a consensus through discussion on how or under whom the general
elections should be held in future, he added.
Ironically, the caretaker government system was introduced in 1996 in the
wake of vigorous movement led by Awami League.
Quader observed that it is difficult to reach an understanding on the issue if
the political leaders cannot come out from their "obsession to the past".
A civil society member, a former bureaucrat, an eminent educationist, a
former minister or a former lawmaker might head the caretaker government
in future in line with the apex court verdict, he suggested. The AL would not
hold one-sided elections, said Quader, also chairman of the parliamentary
committee on information ministry.
Since 1991, those who lost in the general elections held under an interim or
caretaker government raised questions on credibility of the polls and were not
ready to accept the results, he added.

22. Quader urged the main opposition BNP to sit with the parliamentary
constitutional amendment committee and place their opinions in order to
reach a consensus in this regard.
The rulling party Awami League (AL) general-secretary Syed
Ashraful Islam said that the caretaker government ‘experiment’ had failed,
and a national debate should decide whether or not to continue with the
system.
HM Ershad, chairman of Jatiya Party (JP), the key partner of
ruling AL-led grand alliance, also former president said in his
immediate reaction that "I personally respect the judgment of the Supreme
Court".
He said the judgment is the reflection of his party's suggestion to the special
parliamentary committee to amend the constitution.
"I told the committee that the judiciary turns controversial if the chief justice
is made the chief adviser to the caretaker government and the Supreme Court
today [yesterday] observed the same," added the former president.
He said all the major political parties would nominate a person to be the chief
adviser in future.
He however questioned the consequences if the two major parties -- AL and
BNP -- do not reach a consensus. "History says the two parties don't reach an
agreement."
Workers Party president Rashed Khan Menon MP termed the verdict
as vital which would help bringing momentum towards democracy saying
that it is an important verdict considering the prevailing situation. This
judgment has made it easy to find out an alternative to the judiciary involved
in the caretaker government system, said Rashed Khan Menon, president of
the party, in his immediate reaction. He said all the political parties would
now have to find an alternative through discussion and consensus under
whom or which system the elections should be held.

23. Menon added the BNP-led opposition must reach a consensus with the
government for the sake of keeping democracy continuing; otherwise it
would seem they "have an evil intention".
Bangladesh communist party in its instant reaction has welcomed the
verdict of Supreme Court on scrapping Caretaker government system.
Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal President Hasanul Huq Inu termed the
verdict “time worthy”. “The caretaker government system could not continue
forever,” he said in a press statement.
Inu, also a lawmaker, said considering the prevailing political situation
of the country, the next two elections should be held under the caretaker
system.
Law Minister Barrister Shafique Ahmed told reporters that the elected
representatives of the people will form the government and run the country as
per the Constitution. "But the country to be run by an unelected government
seems contradictory to the key characteristics of the Constitution."
Law Minister said that the caretaker government will not be needed if
the Election Commission is independent and strong.If the Election
Commission is independent, it can hold elections fairly and neutrally, he said
in his reaction to reporters at his secretariat office.
Shafique said the Election Commission held upazila and municipality
elections in a free and fair manner.
Democracy will get an institutionalized shape if the Election Commission
plays its independent role strongly, he said as a lawyer in his personal
reaction.
The law minister said he felt that the Supreme Court has declared illegal the
13th amendment to the constitution on consideration that the state should be
governed by elected representatives of people, and governing the state by
unelected persons is unconstitutional.

24. Parliament will take a decision on amending the constitution after
considering the Supreme Court observations with wisdom, he expressed the
hope.
Hailing the supreme court verdict Attorney General Mahbubey
Alam said the verdict is "right in principle". The next two parliamentary
elections will be held under caretaker governments if the constitutional
provisions are not amended, he said. If the next two elections are not held
under caretaker governments, chaos and unrest will take place in the country,
he added.
Barrister MI Farooqui, who stood for the petitioner expressed
satisfaction over the SC verdict, saying it is good for the nation and the
constitution.
Amicus curiae Ajmalul Hossain and the appellant's counsels MI
Farooqui and Mohsen Rashid placed arguments against the caretaker
government system.
Prominent lawyers, civil society advocate to Caretaker government
Prominent lawyers and civil societies of the country has termed the Supreme
Court verdict contradictory itself and argued to save Caretaker Government
system giving their opinion on the behalf of it. There is no confusion on the
Caretaker government system among the mass people.
Noted lawyer Barrister Rafique-ul Huq termed the verdict
contradictory. "In one hand it says the caretaker government is illegal and on
the other hand it says the next two general elections can be held under the
caretaker government system.
Of the amici curiae also senior supreme court lawyer Dr Kamal
Hossain, argued for saving the system of non-party caretaker government as

25. it was introduced through the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in 1996
following a mass movement. He argued before the Appellate Division of the
Supreme Court that the non-party caretaker system had to be introduced as
neither the civil society nor the political parties outside the government
thought that free, fair and neutral polls could be held under a political
government. During the hearing of an appeal against the High Court verdict
that had declared the Thirteenth Amendment valid, Dr Kamal Hossain said, if
there were flaws in the system they could be removed through consultations,
but the apex court should not question the legality of the system considering
“the interest of the people.”
Now that the issue of whether or not to do away with the caretaker
government system has resurfaced should we look with fresh eyes at a system
that has served us well through three elections? Nobody in their right minds
can possibly wish a return of the old system that always became “a free for
all.” Therefore the demand for doing away with the caretaker government
system should be turned down by the Supreme Court for one simple reason -
the people have come to rely on it to oversee the polls. If its loss creates a
crisis of confidence in the electoral and constitutional process, this is
something no one will welcome, as the national polls are the most critical
exercise of democratic freedom.
By making a choice to not stay within the bounds of the parameters set for
politicians, at the time when it was introduced a very dangerous situation had
emerged that called for such a system. In other words, the caretaker system
was the manifestation of the distrust that guides the relationship between the
two major political parties since the fall of the Ershad regime, which is still
continuing unabated.
The question before us all is did the system live up to expectations? Most
will say a positive yes with the exception of the caretaker government headed
by Prof Iajuddin Ahmed that was forced to resign under pressure from the
army. Even so the government that took over from him was installed under
the constitutional provision of the non-party caretaker government.
A caretaker government, and the political parties, must follow the principles
as laid down in the Constitution. The immediate past caretaker government
took root in the Constitution in the form of the 13th Amendment and
although at that time we believed this was the final shape, there must have
been some legal loopholes in the system that gave some people a chance to
grab power. But we must remember that the system was introduced in
response to the need of the day with the intent of making the general

26. elections above board.
The provision of a caretaker government was once a very big political issue
for which the Awami League came on to the street to unseat the BNP
government after the controversial election of February 1996. Before leaving
office, the BNP government amended the Constitution to introduce the
system. Today Sajeda Chowdhury, deputy leader of the house, went on
record by saying, “We do not need a caretaker government if we can
strengthen the Election Commission.”
Today when we have a democratically elected government in power, we must
consider anew whether or not the system of a caretaker government is an
affront to democracy. As a system peculiar to Bangladesh we must consider
if the system is as full of holes as has been claimed. As its powers and
functions are divided between the head of government and the president,
critics may have a point because it created two separate and potentially
conflicting institutions.
But three elections held under the system were all judged to be free and fair,
and people tend to believe that if the system is discontinued there would be a
crisis of confidence in the electoral and constitutional process. Therefore,
before we consider the pros and cons we must remember that, before it came
into existence, Bangladesh was always in a state of political instability.
However, if the government wants democracy to survive without a caretaker
government to keep the peace they, and the opposition members, must start
acting like the true representatives of the people.
We should remember that the provision for a caretaker government was
incorporated into the Constitution on the basis of consensus among all the
political parties. A consensual arrangement brought about by the constant
threat of internal disorder should not easily be thrust aside.
Besides the caretaker system is the manifestation of the distrust that has
guided the relationship between the two major political parties and though we
may have hoped that our politicians would mature over time and learn to
conduct their affairs with dignity and prowess, this has not happened.
Therefore it is better to continue a system that has served the nation well. The
demand for casting aside the caretaker government system must, therefore, be
turned down by the government, opposition and the electorate as its loss will
create a crisis of confidence in the electoral process and the constitutional
process.
After coming this far up the democratic ladder, this is something none of us
should welcome, as the national polls are the most critical exercise of

27. democratic freedom. And now that we have achieved a position where our
election process is by and large free and fair, the prospect of making any
changes is alarming. By making the choice not to stay within the bounds of
the parameters set for politicians, a dangerous situation had emerged that
called for this unique system. In other words, it was the manifestation of the
distrust that has guided the relationship between the two major political
parties.
However a caretaker government must follow the principles as laid down in
the Constitution. Dr Kamal Hossain pointed out that there was no controversy
among the people about the caretaker system and that surely should be the
issue.
TH Khan, Mahmudul Islam, M Amir-Ul Islam, and Rokanuddin
Mahmud gave opinions in favor of the caretaker government system.
Khandker Mahbub Hossain, president of the Supreme Court Bar
termed the Supreme Court verdict self contradictory, saying the SC declared
the 13th amendment illegal, but suggested holding next two parliamentary
elections under this law.
BNP never allow the election without non-party Caretaker
government
BNP led four party allies has expressed their deep concern over the judgment
that declared the caretaker government system illegal. Two allies of four party
alliance expressed tier opinion that a free fair and neutral election never
possible without a non-party caretaker government.
In a statement, Jamaat said, “Present political reality proves that a free and
fair election is not possible under a political government, and without a
caretaker government system.”
BJP Chairman Andaleeve Rahman Partha said caretaker government
system is a must for holding a credible election in the prevailing political
atmosphere in the country.

28. BNP chairperson severely criticized the chief justice ABM Khirul Haque
saying that the incumbent chief justice himself is “partisan”.
She also opposed appointment of Chief Justice Khairul Haque as head of the
next caretaker government. As per the present provision, he is supposed to be
chief adviser of the next caretaker government. She said that the AL
government is hatching conspiracy to cancel the caretaker system to hold
parliament election under its regime.
Quoting the Chairperson Mirza Fokhrul acting general secretary of
BNP said a caretaker government headed by a non-partisan person is a must
for holding the next election. Otherwise, BNP will not accept it.
BNP front ranking leader Barrister Moudud Ahmed terming the
15th amendment unconstitutional in an instant reaction after the
verdict said
"It seems the verdict would not solve the problem, rather it would evoke fresh
controversies and complexities on the concept of caretaker government”.
Pointing to some points of the verdict he told reporters at the court premises
that "those are contradictory".
He said his party will discuss the matter and issue a formal reaction.
BNP has already clarified its intention that it never go to next parliamentary
election without non-party caretaker government. BNP and it allies has
continued their demand to restore the Caretaker government system. This
alliance has been conducting many meetings, programs and procession to
exert pressure on government to reinstall the non party Caretaker government
for many days.
BNP and its allies have already carried out some mega programs. A road
march toward north side of country and another toward chittagong have been
conducted with a big size of bus fleet. In these programs the most important
demand among others was restoration of Caretaker government. The party
has also warned of stern action if the government does not response to their

29. demand. People spontaneously took part in these programs, the party
demanded.
The four party alliances has observed some country wide programs which
was prevented by government forces that claimed 5 lives as police fired on
the protestor.
30 January at a protest program BNP chairperson warn that if government
does not reinstall the Caretaker Government system it will go to mass
upsurge.
The government is not seemed to response to the opposition demand. The
daily incident proves that the government is expressing its aggressive
behavior to the opposition. The government is using the police forces to
suppress the demonstrators. Hence government has already formed a search
committee to scrutinize a body to make Election commission.
BNP also has reiterated its intention that will continue its demonstration until
the government will restore the caretaker government system.
Report from UNB, bdnews24.com, Daily star and Amar Desh.
Chapter-4
Findings
In order to know the public opinion about caretaker government
according to research question we have conduct a survey on 120 people.
Our research area has covered the about full Dhaka city like mogbazar,
mouchak, mirpur, old Dhaka, Dhaka university area, dhanmondi
lalmatia and airport area. The data from those people has been given
bellow.

30. 1. Do you know about Caretaker Government?
Ans.
Opinion Number of respondent Percentage
Yes 120 100%
NO 00 0%
2. What’s your opinion about it?
Ans.
Opinion Number of respondent Percentage
Positive 90 75%
Negative 14 11.76%
No comment 16 13.33%
3. Do you support the government decision on scraping it?
Ans.
Opinion Number of respondent Percentage
Yes 22 18.33%
NO 98 81.67%
4. What the result do you guess for this decision?
Ans.

31. Opinion Number of respondent Percentage
a. Violence 92 60.53%
b. 32 21.05%
Emergence
of 3rd power
c. deterrence 15 9.87%
of
democracy
d. Others….. 13 8.55
5. Could there any alternative to this system?
Ans.
Opinion Number of respondent Percentage
Yes 55 45.83%
NO 65 54.17%
6. Do you believe that the election under partisan
government would be fair free and neutral?
Ans.
Opinion Number of respondent Percentage
Yes 32 26.67%
NO 88 73.33%
7. Would you like to see any changes in present electoral
system?
Ans.

32. Opinion Number of respondent Percentage
Yes 70 58.33%
NO 50 41.66%
8. Do you support the idea of reinstating this system?
Ans.
Opinion Number of respondent Percentage
Yes 95 79.16%
No 25 20.83%
Chapter -5
Data Analysis
According to our research question “What do people think about the care
taker government?” we have to conduct a survey to find out the real opinion
of public whether they want Caretaker government system or not. We have
administered a survey on 120 people of different strata of life respective of
age and gender depending on some questions. The findings have been
mentioned in previous chapter.
In this chapter we will analysis the findings to know the consequences of the
findings.

33. Our 1st question show that our all respondents among 120 know about
Caretaker government system. It proves that the Caretaker government
system is most popular concept. Although 120 respondents do not represent
the all population of our country, it will be not excess to say that our most
population are aware and conscious about politics and caretaker government.
Our 2nd question shows that 75% of our respondents have given their
positive thinking about caretaker government. 11.70% people have given
their opinion against this system. 75% people are on the behalf of caretaker
government system. Because they believe that our political parties can not
trust another. So they can not find out any confidence over fairness and
neutrality of election under any partisan government. So our respondents
believed that in this situation caretaker government is only solution.
On other hand the respondents who are the on against of caretaker
government, they advocate to any alternative of this system.
3rd question show that only 18.33% of our respondent support the
government decision that scrap the caretaker government system. Rests of
81.67% people don’t support the government decision on scraping it. The
respondents who are on the behalf of government decision on scraping this
system, they seek an alternative way of this system.
But who don’t support this decision, they think that this decision severely
affect the next election.
What will be the consequences for scraping the caretaker government
system? that has been expressed by 4th question. Our 60.53% respondents
guess that violence may be occurred. They opine that BNP and AL both
never agree to go election under each other. They will demonstrate on the
street and the government will try to prevent them by their political cadre and
state forces. The recent incident that has claimed five lives and the historical
experience are the perfect examples.
21.05% respondents think that “Emergence of 3rd power” may be occurred
due to scrap of caretaker system. When violation will spread out the country
any 3rd power such as Military ruler or military backed government like
Fokhruddin government may de emerged.

34. 9.87% respondent thinks that due to scraping the caretaker government
system democracy may be severely deterred. Democracy demands a free fair
election through participation of all parties where the opinion of mass people
will be reflected. But our historical experience so bitter. All partisan
government tries to manipulate the election to snatch the power. But when
the election will be held under any non-party caretaker government the risk
of election manipulation does not exist. So the decision on scrap this system
must deterred the democracy, our respondents think.
Among 8.55% respondents, some of them think that nothing will be
happened. But why…..? They did not explain it. Some of them think that
some violence may be occurred, but it’s nothing, because it is our political
culture. At last the national election must be held.
5th question illustrate that whether mass people seek any alternative of
caretaker government or not. 45.83% people seek the alternative of this
system. Some of them advocate to a strong Election commission. A
respondent resident at MOwchak seek military government instead of
caretaker government and democracy. 54.17% people seek the Caretaker
Government system to administer a neutral election. Otherwise election never
gets acceptability, they added.
6th question seek the public opinion about the fairness and neutrality of
election under the partisan government. 26.67% people believe that the
election under partisan government would be fair free and neutral. But they
could not explain how it will be possible. It is seemed that they answered this
question affiliating to the government. 73.33% people believe that the
election under partisan government never would be fair free and neutral. As
argument they cite the example of election of VOLA parliamentary sit which
occurred at the first of this regime.
The 7th question was “would you like to see any changes in present electoral
system”? 58.33% people like to see any change in the present electoral
system. They believed that present electoral system is vulnerable to
manipulate. So they think so. Some of them seek the western electoral
system. Some of them seek EVM that stands for Electronic Voting Machine.
All of them however want a system where manipulations will not be
occurred. 41.66% people do not like any change in present electoral system.

35. They believe that present electoral system is perfect to perform a free fair
election. They believe that manipulation also possible in EVM which is the
latest innovation in our electoral system. A respondent has termed it “Digital
manipulation”.
The 8th question searches public opinion whether they support the idea of
reinstating the Caretaker Government system or not. 79.16% people support
the idea of reinstating this support. Because they believe that the violence,
emergence of third power and deterrence of democracy may be emerged.
The 2nd question has expressed its rating properly. The rest of 20.83% people
do not support the idea of reinstating this system. They believe that election
under partisan government would be fair and neutral.
We can summarize the findings and data analysis which will
offer us some new information.
1. Caretaker Government system is popular concept and
most of the people know about it that proves that most
of the people of our country is aware of it.
2. Most of the people seek Caretaker Government system
to perform a free fair and neutral election. In the
present situation of country the Caretaker Government
must be needed otherwise violence, emergence of third
power, deterrence of democracy and other unexpected
incident may be occurred which are harmful for
country.
3. A big portion of people don’t seek the alternative of this
system in this moment but the portion who seeks its
alternative is near to the portion who does not seek.
4. Most of the people demand a manipulation free
electoral system.
5. Most of the people are against of election under
partisan government.

36. 6. Most of the people are the behalf of reinstating the
Caretaker Government system.
Public opinion survey conducted by others:
The Prothom Alo carried out its survey on 5,000 people across the country,
while The Daily Star surveyed 2,500 people. Two professional organizations
conducted the surveys in the last part of 2011.
According to the surveys, most people think that the country is heading in the
wrong direction.
Around 73 percent people in the surveys opined for holding the next general
elections under a caretaker government.
Hence, there many other public survey conducted by news papers. These
surveys are not survey in true scene, because these surveys are conducted
through online where the respondents are universities teachers, students and
higher educated persons. Here the access of mass people is minimal.
Chapter-6
Recommendation
Caretaker government system was introduced in 1996 with a view to
conducting free fair and neutral election. The government of that time also
present opposition party in the house Bangladesh Nationalist Party compelled
to introduce this system facing the massive demonstration by opposition of
that time also present party in power Bangladesh Awami league. But AL after
coming in the power, a decision of it scraps this system. The opposition is
continually stressing on government to reinstate this system. Otherwise this
party will not participate in the next parliamentary election, it has already
warned.

37. In Bangladesh the democracy is not institutionalized. The democracy is for
only holding the election to exchange the power. Mass people and its priority
are always ignored. The issue of Caretaker Government system for example
can be mentioned. Although opposition party has demanded that public will
never accept this decision but no party did not try to know the public opinion
about Caretaker government system whether they want this system or not. As
a vital element of our course we have to conduct a survey to know the public
opinion about caretaker government. The survey was administered on 120
people.
Majority percent of people has opined on the behalf of caretaker government
system and also has supported the idea to restore this system. They also has
opposed the government decision on scrap this system which has come from
court. The other survey conducted by various news papers also shows that
about 86% people response this system positively.
Bangladesh has bitterly experienced that any election under any partisan
government did not be fair and neutral. The national election of 1973,
presidential election of 1978 and 1986, election of DUCSU and RUCSU bear
the example of election manipulation, snatching the ballot box and occupying
the center. In these elections “Election Commission” played an inactive role
like silence audience and statue. The election of Magura under BNP
government and election of Vola under this government also bear like
consequences. So the history demands that a non- party caretaker government
system must need to administer a credible election.
The national elections held under Caretaker government got reorganization as
free fair acceptable and credible. All Caretaker government have gained
appraise except the Fokhruddin Government because it was unconstitutional
as it expand its tenure and activities avoiding the constitution.
As a democratic government system is under force in Bangladesh and it
demands to give priority the opinion of majority, the government should
respect the opinion of majority reinstalling the caretaker government system.
The history of Bangladesh shows that the partisan government does not
respect the public during election that violates the democracy. Past
experience teaches us that all the elections held under the governments in
power were not accepted by the opposition parties. The political governments

38. in power always showed a lack of ethical values and moral judgment, so an
election under an elected government can no longer gain the trustworthiness
of the general people and opposition political parties of our country.
So Caretaker government system must essential to consolidate the
democracy.
“The Caretaker system may be bad not abandoned” the caretaker
government may be bad, because it’s an unelected government. Any
unelected government never run in any democratic countries. But in the
context of Bangladesh where the political parties can’t trust each other and
governments try to sustain the power, Caretaker government system works as
a mediator. So this system is not abandoned.
Majority percent people believe that violence and third power may be
emerged due to scrap this system. So government should to restore this
system to save the country from violence and third power like unexpected
harmful things.
Some people may show their argument that the decision on scraping
Caretaker Government system has come from judiciary. Here government
has nothing to do, as like as one of the advisor of prime minister said. The
first answer may be that the Supreme Court did not issue this verdict by
SUO-MOTO rule. Why such a popular system was challenged before the
court? The second answer may be that the court also verdict to hold the next
two times election under this system for sake of safety. They also should to
show respect in this verdict.
I personally think that Caretaker government system run since previous some
terms played a vital role to mitigate the chaos among politicians. It has no
rationality to push the country to violence through abolish this system.
The present trend in our political environment indicates that to hold an
impartial and acceptable election there is no alternative to the caretaker
government system. The caretaker government system is a proven platform to
further strengthen democracy in our country through the next general
elections. The majority of the population seems to be in favor of the caretaker
government system. We are now facing such a tough situation that reinstating
the caretaker government system is justified.

39. Here a question may be raised that is free fair and neutral election absolutely
impossible under Election commission? The answer is “No”. Before
independence of Bangladesh the elections of 1954 and 1970 were widely
acclaimed as fair polls having significant impact on the people's movements
which ultimately led to the emergence of sovereign Bangladesh in 1971. But
the picture of after independence is quite opposition. In national election of
1973, presidential election of 1978 and 1986 election commission has been
seen so much inactive and like a statue.
Conclusion: In the end of discussion we can draw a conclusion that as the
contradictory statements of both two grand parties are pushing the countries
to violence, government should reinstall the Caretaker government system
showing the respect to the majority. It also should to respect the verdict of
court that allows the next two terms election to hold under the caretaker
government system. But before removing the caretaker government provision
from the constitution, the government should have held a referendum to
ensure the participation of the general people in a major decision like this
concerning the important national issue.
Our officials, politicians, Election commission and who will form Caretaker
government body must be should contain morality and ethics and such social
capital. If they consider their responsibilities as secret deposit and perform it
properly then we can see our country as a country progressed by peace and
happiness.