Letters To The Editor
Comments on news report
“PM for all-party govt,” published on October 19, 2013
Nasirullah Mridha, USA
Hasina's vague outline of election time government could not mislead BNP. The uncertainty would be persisting unless PM gives up her post during the poll.
Molla A. Latif
The proposal for solving the political problem could be more specific and clear i.e. who would be the head of the all party government, what would be the ratio of MPs from the parties, what would be the number of the ministers and state ministers, should Jamaat also be included in the government, etc. This open proposal will convey a weak message to the opposition and they will find the holes to escape and create anarchy in the country instead of taking it positively for a discussion.
Zman7
While the PM is trying to resolve the political crisis, the authors of this news piece are claiming that PM's proposal is nothing new in the politics; and “almost a similar proposal was rejected by Sheikh Hasina in 1994.” I just wonder what good the opposition and the nation will gain from such media analysis!
Spiderman
A PM belongs to the entire nation and not just to the blind followers and admirers of AL. She misused this opportunity by spending most of her time for so-called achievement propaganda.
Shahin Huq
Such a recycled speech! She has not mentioned anything new. It is obvious that she wants to be the head of the so-called interim government. Why will the people of Bangladesh trust her? If she is serious about free and fair election, what stops her from giving power to a neutral caretaker government for holding acceptable elections?
God propose man dispose
The opposition leader should do the same thing like the PM. She should arrange a press conference or address the nation and propose the details of interim government:
1) Parliament got to be dissolved by October 25.
2) PM/ Speaker/ President or any party leader can't be the head of interim government.
3) LGRD and home should be given to opposition or a noble person from society accepted by all.
SM
Not specific at all. What is the due time and who looks at whose watch to make that call? And citing the constitutional sections written based on your dictation is like citing your own book as reference to prove your own case where the reference material is corrupt with manipulation -- it is not impartial and it was not bipartisan (accepted by majority) when the constitution was amended.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments