Let us have a look into the constitutional provision regarding floor crossing. Article 70(1) of the constitution of Bangladesh says: "A person elected as a member of parliament at an election at which he was nominated as a candidate by a political party shall vacate his seat if he resigns from that party or votes in parliament against that party.

Explanation.-- if a member of parliament -- (a) being present in parliament abstains from voting, or (b) absents himself from any sitting of parliament, ignoring the direction of the party which nominated him at the election as a candidate not to do so, he shall be deemed to have voted against that party."

It may be mentioned that the constitution of Bangladesh, which was adopted on November 4, 1972 and came into force on December 16 of the same year, did not contain the explanatory part in Article 70. It was included in Article 70 by the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1975.

Let us now see what the constitutions in our neighbouring countries say on the vacation of seat by an MP on grounds of his defection.

According to the constitution of India, a member of either House (Council of States or House of People) of Union Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly of a state belonging to any political party shall be disqualified from being a member of the House (a) if he has voluntarily given up his membership of such political party; or (b) if he votes or abstains from voting in such House contrary to any direction issued by the political party to which he belongs without obtaining the prior permission of such political party and such voting or abstention has not been condoned by such political party within fifteen days from the date of such voting or abstention.

According to the constitution of Pakistan, a member of a House (the National Assembly or the Senate) or of the Provincial Assembly shall lose his seat if he defects from a political party which nominated him, or votes contrary to any direction issued by the parliamentary party to which he belongs, or abstains from voting in the House against party policy in relation to a Bill. He however gets an opportunity to appeal and the party chief's decision is final.

The 1990 constitution of Nepal says that the seat of an MP becomes vacant if the party of which he was a member when elected provides notification in the manner set forth by law that he has abandoned the party.

According to the constitution of Fiji, a member of the House of Representatives vacates his seat if he resigns from the political party for which he was a candidate at the time he was last elected to the House of Representatives, or if he is expelled from the political party for which he was a candidate at the time he was last elected to the House of Representatives.

Even though the constitutions in the above-mentioned neighbouring countries contain provisions for vacation of parliament seat by a lawmaker on ground of his defection, yet some constitutional experts and members of civil society argue that Article 70 of our constitution "contradicts the fundamental rights as enunciated in Part 111 of the constitution, thereby curbing the rights of the MPs also, as far as freedom of thought and expression is concerned."

It has also been argued that "Article 70 has, in effect, usurped the powers of the MPs to defend the cause of the people -- more specifically the electorate, who voted them to parliament."

It is further argued that some parliamentary democracies having no such thing as Article 70 of our constitution have not suffered from political instability. They have suggested to suitably amend Article 70 "incorporating the option of an MP to vote according to his conscience except on three fundamental and vital issues, vis-a-vis, (a) when a vote of censure or no-confidence is brought against a particular government, the concerned MP shall invariably vote for the party on whose ticket he was elected; (b) he shall not vote against the Finance Bill or against the smooth passage of the annual budget in whatever form it is placed and presented; (c) on sensitive defence matters which may be debated in camera, if needed. And except when a motion of no-confidence is moved, the members of parliament may be allowed to speak freely on any other subject maintaining the decorum of the House as far as possible."

The other group of constitutional experts and knowledgeable people argue that Article 70 of our constitution "was framed after much thought to ensure stability and strengthen parliamentary democracy."

They say that parliamentary democracy that was introduced in the constitution adopted on November 4, 1972 did not survive for more than three years. The deadly blow came when multi-party parliamentary system of government was replaced by one-party presidential form of government through the Constitution (Fourth amendment) Act, 1975.

Thereafter, the country suffered under two martial laws for about a decade. Parliamentary democracy came to be reintroduced through the Constitution (Twelfth Amendment) Act, 1992. But the confrontational politics of the two major political parties -- the BNP and the AL -- have created an unhealthy situation for the growth of the nascent democracy. Moreover, Bangladesh should be compared with other parliamentary democracies in South Asia. Although India has a long tradition of parliamentary democracy, yet its constitution contains the provision of unseating a lawmaker for his defection.

Let me come back to the case of Kazi Sirajul Islam. Upon a petition filed by the AL, the Speaker of parliament declared on June 9 the parliamentary seat of Faridpur-1 vacant following the defection of Kazi Sirajul Islam. Necessary gazette notification has already been issued to this effect. Now the questions arise as to why Kazi Sirajul Islam defected from the AL, and was it necessary for the BNP at the moment to lure him to the party? A staunch Awami Leaguer, Kazi Sirajul Islam was twice elected MP from Faridpur-1 on the AL ticket.

A report published in a Bangla daily (Prothom Alo) on June 7 suggested that he joined the BNP to settle a business deal of Tk.14 crore or so. Quoting the AL leadership, one English daily (The Independent) of June 5 reported that he was allegedly involved in immoral activities including smuggling of gold and diamonds. It is thus alleged that he left the AL and joined the ruling BNP in order to settle the business deal as well as to save himself from the due process of law for his alleged involvement in immoral activities(I proffer no opinion on the accuracy of these allegations).

Let me turn to the second point. Was it necessary for the BNP to lure him to the party at this moment? The BNP-led alliance commands more than two-third seats in parliament. The BNP itself has got two hundred-plus seats in parliament. Some political analysts are of the opinion that the BNP wants to make a dent in the greater Faridpur area (Faridpur, Rajbari, Gopalganj, Madaripur, and Shariatpur) where it got only 4 seats (2 in Rajbari and 2 in Faridpur) against 16 seats in the parliamentary election of 2001. It would not be surprising if more MPs elected on the AL tickets from the AL dominated areas are lured to join the ruling BNP in the coming days.

To conclude, the confrontational politics of the BNP and the AL has already become a cause of concern for the democracy loving people of Bangladesh. During their visit to Dhaka sometime in the second half of the last year, the representatives of two big powers clearly indicated that "squabbling politicians must not take democracy for granted as their confrontational politics was fuelling violence and wrecking the nation's economy. To save democracy, leaders of the two mainstream political parties must come together to thrash out differences by negotiations."

People are, therefore, worried about the fate of their hard-earned democracy. In such a situation the ruling BNP must not lure any opposition MP, particularly of the main opposition AL, into the fold of the BNP. Such incidents will take the relationship between the BNP and the AL to a point of no return. This may await the return of the next caretaker government.

M. Abdul Latif Mondal is a former secretary to the government.