According to media reports, the Election Commission has expressed its inability to defray the expenses of the premature armed forces deployment by saying that it had not asked for such engagement. The Ministry of Home Affairs, which, it appears, would have to bear the expenses, does not have budgetary arrangement to meet the contingencies and, therefore, a request for extra resources in addition to the anticipated ones for the upcoming general election has to be made. The extra expenditure to be incurred, for apparently no justifiable reasons, at a time characterized by a shortfall in revenue receipts should be cause for concern.

Too many people are loudly proclaiming the supremacy of the rule of law and the inviolability of our constitution. The same people are oblivious to the fact that rule of law represents a challenge to state authority and power, and that exercise of power has to be according to the law. "According to law" means both according to the legal rules and something over and above purely formal legality, and includes the concepts of legitimacy and constitutionality. This legitimacy implies rightness or morality of law.

The law is not autonomous but rests upon the support of those it governs; the law is the servant of the sense of rightness in the community. While the rule of law places law above every individual, irrespective of rank and station, it remains, paradoxically, subject to the ultimate judgment of the people.

The holding of general election within ninety days of the dissolution of the parliament is being held as sacrosanct by some quarters. But curiously enough not much note is taken of the obstinacy of the chief adviser that has been the contributing factor toward losing 45 (Forty Five) days out of the 90 (Ninety) days within which election has to be held.

The fourteen party combine and other parties have demanded that, in order to compensate for the aforementioned loss of time, the election has to be deferred for 45 days. The prescribed period of ninety days, according to expert opinion, can be extended after taking into account the great purposes of the constitution and overriding national imperatives.

It has been wisely said that elections are the heartbeat of a democracy. If the heartbeats occur in an irregular manner then democracy is liable to collapse. The fate of our democracy will depend on our conscious choice. We have to decide whether we shall accord supremacy to the law or the will of the people, and if we should constitute a moral association maintained by duty or a physical one kept together by force.

Many amongst us are insisting on acting according to the constitution only in so far as holding of election within the stipulated 90 days is concerned. While political governments in Bangladesh have often acted unconstitutionally, the reality, as of now, is that the present stalemate, arising principally out of an admittedly flawed voters list, has been caused by the Election Commission's flouting of the apex court's orders. That action by itself very prominently points to the unfortunate ignoring of the constitution by a constitutional body.

Additionally, it has now been accepted that a palpably partisan person has been appointed as election commissioner, despite concerted efforts to credibly constitute the election overseeing body. The scenario has been further complicated by the appointment of nearly 300 partisan persons as election officers by the last political government. Under such circumstances, don't we receive an ominous signal that some quarter is bent upon holding an election anyhow, and thus pretending to be the protectors of the sacred constitution?

It does not take a discerning observer to express reservations about the neutrality and non-partisan character of the Iajuddin led government. He is clearly a political appointee, as opposed to the preceding chief advisers, and, as such, his actions are suspect. He has assumed the charges of the office of chief adviser without clearly exhausting the available constitutional options. His subsequent actions have validated his detractor's accusations of partiality and of carrying out the wishes of his patrons.

The issues of paucity of time to correct the voter's list and the constitutional compulsion to hold election within 90 days have to be considered against the background of the present politico-administrative reality. A prominent adviser of last caretaker government has already commented that the law and order situation is not stable and within control. Such a statement assumes heightened significance when one witnesses the more-than-sporadic armed clashes between political activists at several places of the country, with no assurance that such incidents will not occur in the run-up to the election.

The question, therefore, is whether election with a manifestly defective voters list will be acceptable, and whether such election can be held in a peaceful atmosphere? Alternately, will the skies fall if the election schedule is deferred to ensure a relatively correct voters list and, thus, a credible election?

We must not be oblivious to the delicate situation that has arisen following the honorable chief justice's last minute stalling of the issuance of rule pertaining to the writ petitions that challenged the legality of the president's assumption of the office of chief adviser, and the maintainability of an apparently flawed voters list.

In a contentious situation like this where the principal actors and the institutions responsible for overseeing the election are entangled in a legal dispute awaiting urgent resolution, will a hastily arranged polls only to satisfy the so-called constitutional deadline be logical? Is not there something like a doctrine of state necessity under irreversible circumstances? Is not the current situation very appropriate for warranting a reference to the Supreme Court by the honorable president, as envisaged in Article 106 of the constitution?

The eleventh amendment of the constitution was effected only to validate a legally unacceptable action, and to accede to people's wishes at historically determining times. In view of the present deadlock, a reference to the apex court for examining the probable extension of the election schedule in public interest would be deemed as a pragmatic act of a thinking establishment.

The peril of political promiscuity is writ large on the body politic. Let us not rush for short-term gain, as that will ensure long-term pain. The stultification at the apex has been embarrassing, but we may not have reached the precipice. Hope lies in the possibility that the advisory council, which is steered by the president, can still venture out of its somnolence to convincingly demonstrate that it is not a sinecure entity.

Muhammad Nurul Huda is a former Secretary and IGP.