BD govt may legislate against general strikes
By Tabibul Islam
DHAKA: The government and the principal opposition Awami League are locked in a battle of words over the justifiability of taking to strike to press for demands despite its apparently debilitating effects on the economy.
The verbal clashes, which have more and more members of the public joining in by the day, were prompted by the recent announcement by Local Government Minister Abdul Mannan Bhuiya in Parliament that a law would be enacted to ban strike in the country.
According to the minister, a nation aspiring for rapid economic and intellectual growth, could no longer afford “destructive political programme like strike”.
He said that with the parliamentary system of governance starting to take root in Bangladesh, there was no point in going for agitational actions like strike as the opposition had ample opportunities to raise its voice in parliament against any government action they found fault with.
A leader of the dominant Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) in the ruling coalition has also since confirmed that at the moment, the government was contemplating to ban strike, which has become the favourite “weapon” of opposition political parties.
Awami League chief and immediate past Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina herself has said that “strike is an appropriate weapon to put the political opponent in a tight corner on any issue”.
But the BNP stalwart who does not want to be named clarifies that “right now we are not thinking of doing away with the right of trade unions in commercial organizations and industrial units to call strike in support of their legitimate demands”.
To be sure, many agree that a strike almost always has a negative impact on the economy. Even Shah ASM Kibria, former finance minister of the administration of Sheikh Hasina, says that the economy suffers a loss of as much as $60 million a day during a countrywide strike.
All trade bodies of the country, including the Bangladesh Federation of Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Dhaka Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce and Industry, have been unanimous in saying that strike “destroys” the national economy and causes untold miseries to the self-employed people.
More than two million self-employed people live in Dhaka alone. They and their families are forced to go hungry on days of strike because they are unable to sell their goods.
Moreover, say businessmen, strike is always accompanied with violence. Authorities estimate that on average, more than 40 people are killed across the country in violence and bloody clashes during strike days.
More often than not, the victims are people who lived from hand to mouth, such as rickshaw pullers, day labourers and vendors.
Although they know the streets are dangerous during strike because of “enforcers” who sometimes even throw hand grenades, these people still try to eke out a living out of desperation.
Despite all these, Bimal Biswas, secretary of the left-leaning Workers Party, says strike is an effective weapon to realise the legitimate rights and demands of the people.
“This right was achieved through struggle,” he says. “People will not respect any law that is detrimental to their interest. If anybody thinks that strike can be effectively discouraged and resisted through legislation, he is really living in fool’s paradise.”
The English language “Daily Star” newspaper also ran an editorial saying: “Freedom is the life-blood of free media and therefore we cannot be (a) party to any legislation that will curb peoples’ democratic rights.”
But it added: “Strikes must end if we are to ever become a possible destination for foreign investment. Economic growth is the only way to rescue our people from grinding poverty from which they suffer. So if our politicians love the people as they claim, then they must stop calling strikes.”
The Bangladeshi language daily “Ajker Kagoj”, however, looks at the debate from a slightly different angle.
In one editorial, it said that if there were mutual tolerance and welfare of the people were manifest in all state activities, the necessity of strike as a political weapon would not arise at all.
And in such a scenario, said the newspaper, the ”undemocratic desire to enact law to ban strike would not lurk”.—Dawn/InterPress Service.

