The problem of anti-hopping law in a democratic country:
Considering the first experiences of political defections in the erstwhile east Pakistan provisions for preventions of floor crossing as inserted in article 70 has been salutary howsoever undemocratic they may be.For the purpose of establishing stable parliamentary democracy in Bangladesh a provision like this is unavoidable. These provisions would certainly strength the fabric of parliamentary democracy in Bangladesh by curbing unprincipled and unethical political defections and side swapping.However in providing for preventios of floor crossing the constitution makers seem to have done more than what was necessary.Anti hopping laws are essential only for the stability of the government and that can better be ensured if these laws are imposed when the cabinate faces a no-confidence or confidence motion. But as the provision goes in article 70 .No member of the rulling party can exercise democratic right to dissent even when the government passes an undemocratic law.Article 70 underminds the whole spirit of responsible government and leads to elected dictatorship in Bangladesh. It is important to note here that the report of the constitution drafting committee shows that there were as many as 6 notes of dissent and four of them had opinion against and as to amendment of the provisions of article 70 . But none of dissenters suggested for a compromising process where by both the floor crossing can be prevented and the spirit of responsible parliamentary government can be sustained.Also an interview with Barrister Amirul Islam gives the idea that the constitution makers had neither knowledge of nor could they contemplate the compromising process.