The free choice of the people must be guaranteed

No better method of governing people than democracy has yet been discovered. The main basis of democracy is public opinion. If public opinion is ignored, democracy cannot progress even one step. However, it happens that at the crossroads of democracy, dictatorships, autocracies, or fascisms settle on people's chests. The great philosopher and political scientist Aristotle probably called the democratic system of governance an inferior system in recognition of this negative aspect of democracy. However, although democracy is subject to much criticism, if the trend towards fair democracy continues, there seems to be no better system of governance in the world today. There are many criteria for determining whether or not a democracy is fair. However, according to Jefferson, the acceptable criterion is that if the government fears the people, it is a democracy and if the people fear the government, it is a doctrine contrary to democracy. I leave it to the reader to examine the current situation in Bangladesh. After independence, democracy in Bangladesh suffered repeated setbacks.

Where people have no freedom of expression, there are massive explosions. However, by removing the barrel of the gun, the explosive crowd can be suppressed for a while, but ordinary people can't get much out of it if they're backed into a corner. Differences of opinion must be resolved by mutual discussion. They will be resolved in favour of self-defence if they are taken to the police, to the BGB, politically, people will continue to protest. As things develop, this peace will play a major role in repressing the fact that peace and war were friends, as they were in the past.

That's what happened in Bangladesh. It was said that it was only in the interests of development, first development and then democracy. The results obtained in various countries around the world show just how beneficial this form of government will be for the people of these countries.
If it's good enough to be able to eat three meals a day, Gaddafi's Libyans were the best in the world. If he had been able to stay in power solely for the sake of development, Russian socialism would have stayed in power forever. Neither Colonel Muammar Gaddafi of Libya nor Russian socialism lasted. In addition to eating generously and having money, other important elements are needed to live well in human life. The right that people have by birth, but which is sometimes hindered for various reasons. However, people do not agree to give up this right at any price, but do their best to get it back. Even if it seems to go against the state or the law, they don't stop. There are many countries in the world today, particularly in the Middle East, where every citizen was born with a great deal of wealth, but even these countries were not at peace.

The rise of the Middle East, in particular Egypt and Libya, as part of the "Arab Spring" has demonstrated this. The majority of Libyans believe that Gaddafi's regime can be considered the golden age of Libyan history, but because he deprived people of their fundamental rights and freedom of expression, he was forced not only to abdicate, but also to die, with terrible consequences. The former world superpower ruled for 74 years in the name of the development of the Russian Socialist Party. During this long period, Russia was recognised as one of the most powerful countries in the world, but the consequences of socialism were also terrible. The Russian people witnessed the miserable situation of the absence of democracy.

Ordinary people in Bangladesh have been struggling since independence to discover what democracy is and what democratic law is. Democratic rights mainly mean freedom of expression through freedom of speech and freedom of choice of preferred candidates through the right to vote. Citizens have virtually lost both these rights. The State has strategically suppressed freedom of expression through a decision by the judiciary. On the other hand, following the decision of the Electoral Commission, almost two thirds of the country's inhabitants were deprived of their right to vote in the last legislative elections. Given that the judiciary and the Electoral Commission are state institutions, there should be no objection to saying that the state has usurped the democratic rights of the people. If freedom of expression is suppressed, the country's ruling class gains little, but the bells of the country's ruin begin to ring.

If no one has the freedom to steer leaders in the right direction when they go wrong, it's not just bad for the state; it's also bad for the political party in power. No established political party in the country wants to stay in power for one or more terms, but rather for the long term. To satisfy this desire, we need to get closer to the people. The only way to attract people is to value public opinion and understand the language of the people. The right to vote is a democratic and civil right of the people. In the past, while citizens opposed to the rulers took part in the movement to overthrow the government whenever they had the chance, supporters of the rulers were also angry with their leaders and tried to set up new equations. Because ordinary citizens don't have much power, apart from the right to vote. If you take away what's left, what's left? If you look at the bigger picture, for the well-being of everyone, the democratic rights taken away by the state should be given back to ordinary citizens. There is no other way of eliminating the anxiety and fear that exist among the country's 171 million inhabitants than to give them back their democratic rights.

The free choice of the people must be guaranteed in government elections. Freedom of expression must be granted and equal rights for men and women must be guaranteed. A truly undemocratic government is bureaucratic. A military or paramilitary government, strong in arms but weak in terms of public support, wants to keep civil servants in its favour by granting them various privileges. One way of keeping civil servants under control is to promote them frequently. Today, the number of senior civil servants is enormous. There are no grades, only promotions. This situation is also detrimental to democracy. Without an impartial bureaucracy and an independent judiciary, the economic development of any modern democratic state will not benefit the population.

All fundamental rights are human rights, but not all human rights are fundamental rights. Only those rights recognised as fundamental rights by a country's constitution are considered to be fundamental rights of citizens. In the Constitution of Bangladesh, the fundamental rights of citizens are described in Articles 26 to 44. These rights include equality before the law, the right to asylum, the right to life and liberty, protection from arrest and detention, freedom of movement, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of thought and conscience and freedom of expression, freedom of profession, freedom of religion, the right to property, freedom of the press, and so on.

On 10 December 1948, the United Nations declared human rights universal. The United Nations recognised 25 human rights in the Declaration. These 25 human rights, which have been included in the national constitutions of various countries, constitute the fundamental rights of the citizens of that country. Legal recognition of human and fundamental rights does not guarantee that citizens will be able to enjoy these rights. Citizens cannot enjoy human and fundamental rights without a democratic environment and the goodwill of the national government. Real democracy, the institutional structure of democracy, the practice of democracy and democratic culture are prerequisites for the enjoyment of human and constitutional rights. In the absence of democracy, the human rights of citizens are not respected. A citizen does not acquire the status of a human being in society.

The writer is a Geneva-based private banking compliance security expert, columnist and poet.