| JuryFury.com
Now Every 15th of the Month ! Online School of Politics |
|||
| Areas of Interest THE USA American Foreign Policy US House and Senate US Presidents State & Local Politics Regional Politics Politics of China The British Commonwealth Indian Subcontinent Middle East The European Union Africa Latin America ASEAN NATO United Nations The Non-aligned Movement Eastern Europe New Nations of the 20th Century General Topics Constitutional Law Human Rights Nuclear Disarmament & Treaties International Warfare Environmental Law Peace Treaties Economic & Social Alliances International Organizations Journalism & Media Racism and Democracy Women in the Workplace Family Law Courts and Practices The Judicial System Higher Education Education and Government Health Care & Insurance Rights of the Disabled Copyright & Working Online Legal Representation Legal Insurance Pornography Domestic Violence Religion & Law Workers Rights Employers Rights Prison & Life after Social Organizations Welfare & Poverty Taxation and Democracy Third World Aid Programs Space Exploration Alternative Energy Petroleum Industry & Cars Nuclear Power Programs for the Arts Sports Education Policing the Internet Privacy and freedom Immigration Food and Regulation War on Drugs War on Pharmaceuticals Public Housing Pollution and Control Sexual Harrassment Discrimination Electoral Process Consumers Rights Investors Rights Abortion Death Penalty Social Security Gender & Sexuality Grassroots Organization ACLU World Watch Oxfam UNICEF United Negro Fund Ford Foundation (suggestions welcome at our chatsite) Law of the Economy Join I-Traderschool, our sister magazine, for debates and news. |
South Asian Politics
The Constitution of Bangladesh: What works and what makes no sense. by Sophia Barkat For the longest time I've wondered about it. What is the Constitution of Bangladesh? What does it say about our rights as citizens? Is it a fair constitution? Should it be amended? Upon reading it -- http://www.bangla2000.com/Bangladesh/constitution.html -- I was left very disturbed. It is as though the Constitution is self-contradictory and at times so idealistic it cannot be enforced. Let me explain. Self Contradictory: Rights of Citizens It makes law, the Freedom of Speech (Article 39), of the Press (Article 40), of Assembly (Article 37), of Religion (Article 41), of Movement (Article 36). It declares Equal Opportunity to all citizens (Article 19), that all citizens are equal before law (Article 27), and prohibits religious, gender, race, birth-place, discrimination when it comes to access to State Welfare (Article 28.) or Public Office. And yet, it declares a State Religion (Article 1, 1988) -- Islam. It can repeal citizenship (Article 6). It restricts the age of the Presidential candidate to a minimum of 35, and the age of Members of Parliament to a minimum of 25. It gives the President Immunity from Criminal Prosecution while in office -- 10yrs tops. International Relations It says, that the State must respect national sovereignty of other nations, not interfere in affairs of other nations, work towards peaceful resolutions of conflicts, and follow the UN Charter. (Article 25) And yet, it says, that the State must uphold the right of every people to determine and build up own social economic political systems (Article 25) and to support oppressed people against imperialism, colonialism and racialism. (Article 25) But how is it possible to support oppressed people in other nations without interfering in the affairs of other nations? If this surprises you, here's where the Founding Fathers and the reformers had no clue about the significance of Laws. For if laws are unrealistic then how are they to be upheld? Idealistic Laws: Property and the Economy The Constitution allows people to own private property, collective property, engages in private business (Article 13). It also promises people that the State shall provide basic needs -- such as workers' rights and employment, food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, education, social security, leisure time. (Article 14, 15) And yet, it's not able to provide this services that the Constitution calls Rights of all citizens. As the Parliament is responsible for the financial budget and economic planning of the nation, should we not demand the resignation of any Government that cannot deliver these Rights? One way out of it is to repeal the rights and allow people to better themselves. Since we are already a poor country, this is not an option. So, should new laws be written into the Constitution to help the Parliament achieve these goals, like laws that say if "A government couldn't reduce unemployment by at least 10% then it's leader -- Prime Minister -- can't run again"? Ignoring what laws make sense: Rights The Constitution says that it protects "the right to life" (Article 32). It says that all citizens are equal before law and entitled to protection (Article 27). It protects citizens from secret arrest and unlimited detention (Article 33) and ensures a trial within 24hrs (Article 34). And yet, the State does enforce these laws to protect it's citizens from Fatwas -- the case of Author, Taslima Nasreen -- or from political persecution of other parties by political parties in power. Laws that give Criminals Political Power: According to the Constitution a person shall be disqualified for election as, or for being, a member of Parliament who has been, on conviction for a criminal offence involving moral turpitude, sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years unless a period of five years has elapsed since his release. (Article 66) This gives criminals like ex-President Ershad, Gholam Azam, and many Awami League and Bangladesh Nationalist Party members the ability to run for Parliament, since many are crooks. More so, the President is exempt from criminal prosecution while in office, as mentioned before, though he can be impeached or retired. These are some of the problems and logical flaws that sprung up immediately. I wonder if anyone will do anything to address the issue. |
Yahoo! World News Headlines Our Winners Club Our Contributors Research Links Legal Advice ALL Awards & Internships Become an Activist Join an Organization Get Volunteerism Alert Write Letters to a local Politician Start your own Group Applied Politics Projects Suggest a Project Start your Yahoo Groups Get Internship Credit Funding for Projects Encourage Discussion Join Juryfury Chat Promote Juryfury.com Join online discussion Groups Be In the Spotlight Let us Interview you : Authors of political books Activists Journalists Lawyers Law Enforcement Politicians Politican Scientists Be A Columnist Get Internship Credit Write twice a Month Get Heard Start a Yahoo Group Advertise with Us Books (Free) Political Our Staff & Contributors Our Magazines Quietpoly.com I-Traderschool Juryfury.com The Company Our Address: QuietPoly Inc. 240 W. Saunders. Dr. (#146) Flagstaff, AZ 86001 Tel (928) 214-7365 quietpoly@yahoo.com |
|