The debate of “more development and less democracy” has been the subject of discussion in different countries at different times. In recent years, the development or democracy debate has attracted the attention of policy-makers in Bangladesh. After the January 5 elections, it seemed that the present ruling party was also moving towards this model -- “more development and less democracy.”
In recent days, policy-makers of the present government have drawn our attention by arguing that we need development first and democracy second. But is this model appropriate for Bangladesh?
There are lots of examples of this model in the world, where many countries enjoyed rapid economic development. If we see the scenario of East Asian and South-East Asian countries such as China, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, etc, we see that they have gone through huge economic growth over the last 40 years.
Though China, Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Singapore were under some form of autocracy or one-party ruling system, they made huge economic progress and development.
There are also some exceptions in different regions like Brazil, India, South Africa, and, obviously, the USA and Canada, where democracy accelerated with the pace of economic growth. Most noticeably, India, the largest democratic country in the world, from the very beginning of its journey after independence, has been enjoying the triumph of economic growth. Now, it has emerged as one of the economic powers of the world and marching towards becoming a developed country.
However, it seems Bangladesh has chosen the path of development. At present, development is not defined by only economic growth, rather by other multi-dimensional factors such as economic, social, political, and environmental development.
Good governance is a precondition of human development. Now, will less democracy ensure good governance in Bangladesh? If we suddenly turn into more of an autocracy than a democracy, there can certainly be huge consequences. We have been using the parliamentary democratic system since 1991, and the sudden change may not be accepted by the common people. This new model obviously will lessen our political freedom.
It can also raise corruption levels, and we have already experienced some big economic scandals in the banking sector. Bangladeshi people have a long history of fighting against autocracy. And this political transition may bring about more violence, chaos, and unrest in our society by creating social divisions.
Besides, the fact is, people across the world do want democracy, as there is more freedom of choice -- which is the main notion of human development as initiated by the UNDP. Public opinion all over the world shows a clear preference for democracy as the best form of government. A global survey by Gallup International across all continents in 2005 revealed that around 80% of men and women considered democracy to be the best available form of government.
A global UN survey in 2003 confirmed that an overwhelming number of people also see democracy as a development priority. Moreover, Bangladesh is basically an aid-based developing country. Most of the development projects are implemented with loans from foreign donor agencies. Usually, most of the donor agencies have goals specific to supporting democracy. For the EU, democracy is the founding principle and one of the fundamental objectives of its foreign policy.
We have some shortcomings in our democratic government system, such as inefficiency, corruption, an ineffective parliament, weak leadership, and the constant threat of coups. Since being independent from Pakistan in the 1970s, we have suffered two military coups, political violence due to an ineffective two-party system, poverty, malnutrition, and low literacy rates, among others.
The latest incident was the occupation by the caretaker government -- for more than two years -- which was supposed to provide us with a free, fair, and credible election within three months. And thus, our democratic governance has been disrupted and hampered again and again.
So, it is clear that both “democracy before development” and “development before democracy” have had success in some parts of the world and have failed in others. In fact, a strong political system leads to economic development, whether it is a democracy or an autocracy. It is strongly recommended that our political system and political institutions are reformed and revised.
We have to ensure some democratic principles for proper economic development such as the free flow of information, transparency, and the liberalisation of financial sectors. As development and democracy walk hand in hand, we can choose democracy, as we began our journey in 1972, with four fundamental principles -- and one of them was democracy.