The Parliament of Bangladesh: Representation and Accountability

Abstract

This article is inspired by a recent debate in Bangladesh about the representative credentials of members of parliament (MPs) who have started to assert a pre-eminent and exclusive role for themselves as people's elected representatives. It investigates three dimensions of their representative role. Political representation is analysed by fairness of the electoral process and the space for opposition. Representation of social diversity is evaluated by gender, religion, ethnicity and socio-economic background of MPs. Constituency representation is explored with a particular focus on parliamentarians' involvement in local development work. Provision of constituency services by the MPs, through control and partisan distribution of public resources, has led to allegations of corruption and conflict of interest. Adoption of a code of parliamentary conduct is essential to establish a formal mechanism to hold MPs accountable to citizens.

Keywords:

• Bangladesh
• parliamentary representation
• election
• social diversity
• constituency service
• code of parliamentary conduct

Acknowledgements

This article draws on selected data presented previously in Rounaq Jahan and Inge Amundsen, The Parliament of Bangladesh: Representation and Accountability, CPD-CMI Working Paper Series 2, CPD, April 2012. The author would like to thank Hasanuzzaman, Senior Research Associate, Meherun Nesa, Research Associate, and ASM Tarek Hassan Semul, Project Assistant at CPD for their assistance with data collection. Doctor Inge Amundsen, Senior Researcher, Chr. Michelsen Institute (CMI), Bergen, Norway, provided valuable comments on an earlier draft. This research was conducted under the BDG 3127 CMI–CPD Research Cooperation Programme, funded by the government of Norway.

Notes

1. For example, TIB published a study entitled Positive and Negative Roles of the Members of the 9th Parliament: A Review, which reported that 97 per cent of MPs have been involved in some form of ‘negative activities'. This generated a strong reaction from MPs and government. Soon after the report was published the information ministry sought clarification from TIB about the study's research methodology and later, in a statement, faulted TIB research findings as ‘preconceived’.

2. The constitution refers to Adivasis in article 23A as ‘tribes, minor races, ethnic sects and communities'. The article states that ‘the state shall take steps to protect and develop the unique local culture and tradition of the tribes [upajati], minor races [khudro jatishaotta], ethnic sects and communities [nrigoshthi o shomprodai]’. The Avidasis, however, want to be classified as indigenous people.

Additional information

Note on Author

Rounaq Jahan is a Distinguished Fellow at the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD), Dhaka, Bangladesh