Lawmakers in different Parliaments in Europe and many parts of Asia too feel encouraged to speak proudly of the conduct of their Parliaments. On the other hand, we feel discouraged to speak about the performances of our lawmakers in the Parliament.

The last session of the eighth Parliament remained ineffective because of the boycott of the Parliament by the major opposition party (Awami League) law makers over the abusive remarks against the leader of the opposition Sheikh Hasina by State Minister for Housing and Public Works Alamgir Kabir. Prime Minister's Parliamentary affairs advisor, who is also an elected member of the Parliament, is on record as making invective remarks against the political leaders and a section of journalists was not even spared. The Parliament is considered to be the mirror of the country. Considered opinions of the law makers is reflected on national and international issues in their speeches, apart from their enacting laws and amending existing laws, if necessary, to meet the needs of the country. Unfortunately last session of the eighth Parliament witnessed invectives against political leaders. This is not the way proceedings of the Parliament should be conducted by the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. The opposition in the Parliament demanded expunction of unparliamentary words used against Sheikh Hasina, unconditional apology from Alamgir Kabir, and promise from the Speaker to conduct the proceedings in line with the constitution and the rules of procedure of the Parliament. These seem to be minimum demands that one could expect from the opposition. As the demands were not met the session of the Parliament ended without their presence.

Why the question of expunction of derogatory or unparliamentary words will arise in the first place? It is the responsibility of the Chair to ensure that unparliamentary words are not used in any speech in the Parliament. Members of the Parliament are immuned from court proceedings if speeches are made against any decision. That does not mean that a lawmaker is immuned from making derogatory remarks in the House, which is tantamount to violation of the sanctity of the Parliament.

In 20 months time following the formation of eighth Parliament 39 ministerial standing committees were finally constituted in the last session. We must cheer the authorities for undertaking the task of constituting such vitally important committees, but two seats in each of the ten member slots were left vacant for inclusion of members from the main opposition party. It is really amazing to note that the ruling party did not succeed in securing names of the members of the Parliament belonging to main opposition party in 20 months time. Apart from this, not a single Chairmanship of the standing committees went to the opposition nor to coalition partners. According to newspaper report, one important member belonging to JP (Manju group) resigned from the standing committee as a junior member of the Parliament headed the committee. Anowar Hossain Manju, MP considered being in the Committee as disgraceful and humiliating.

The main opposition blamed the government for forming only partial Parliamentary standing committees without any representation from the opposition, which violated article 247 (1) of the rules of procedure. The constitution of Parliamentary standing committees appearing to be incomplete and in violation of existing rules of procedure, also caused dissatisfaction among senior members of the ruling party.

Can we take lesson from the instances of other countries to improve our system? In this connection, I would like to draw attention of the lawmakers to the committee structure in the Congress of the United States. The committees are key to Congressional behaviour: their decisions, more often than not, become the decision of each House. They establish sub-committees within an important committee, such as, House appropriation committee and the House foreign affaires committee.

Similarly, 22 permanent Parliamentary committees in Bundestag (Parliament) in the Federal Republic of Germany play very significant role in scrutinising and controlling activities of the government. The committees correspond to the Federal government's departments and cover all the ministries. The committees range from foreign affairs to the budget committee. Chairmanship of the committees in the US Congress or in Bundestag in Germany generally goes to senior and experienced members of the Parliament.

It is however, encouraging to note that in her speech in the Parliament on 16 July the Prime Minister, reportedly urged the Awami League to return to the Parliament and avoid boycotting to make it effective. It is true that without Parliament there will be no democracy whatever that we have. On the basis of consensus of all political parties Parliamentary democracy has been introduced in the country by amending the constitution. In Parliamentary democracy members from the opposition bench should be given enough time to speak on any issue of national importance as they are elected representatives from their constituencies. If they are not allowed to speak, what will they do sitting in the Parliament? Moreover, the Speaker or Deputy Speaker should conduct the proceedings of the Parliament impartially in line with rules of procedure to make it effective. The existing Parliamentary system in the country needs to be modernised to make it a dynamic institution to guide the nation as the House of Commons in Great Britain has been doing for the last few centuries. The government and opposition members in the Parliament jointly should evolve a mechanism for reform in line with other countries where Parliamentary system works successfully.

Mohammad Amjad Hossain is a former diplomat