Analyses of Bangladesh's last three elections would reveal the dark side of our politics, which to a large extent replicates practices marked by a policy of exclusiveness, keeping the major opposition party out of the fray, and creating a loyal opposition obligated to the ruling party. It is disheartening to see the ruling party, a political party with established credentials, replicate a highly undemocratic innovation of a military ruler of keeping a tamed opposition in parliament. In fact, in its turn, the Awami League has gone a step further and appointed a few of them as cabinet ministers.

The 12th parliamentary election is just round the corner, and Bangladesh has come under international radar in this regard. Our development partners, the UK and US in particular, have expressed their views on the type of elections they would like to see in 2023. The US ambassador did not mince words when he said that his country wanted to see a fair and "internationally" acceptable election in Bangladesh. It has also engaged the attention, and rightly so, of the ruling party.

Firstly, no election would be valid without the participation of the other major political party, the BNP. And here lies the problem. BNP is loath to participate in the next general election under the current government running the administration. And the Awami League would not have it any other way. It would not relinquish power before the expiry of its term. The respective positions expose the irony of the situation in which we see a reversal of the previously held positions of the two parties. Awami League, once a strident votary of a neutral caretaker system, no longer thinks it a good idea, and the BNP, which had initially opposed the idea, thinks that the only way a free and fair election could be ensured is by having a neutral body at the helm of the administration.

Read more

How fares the opposition in Bangladesh?

I believe both the ideas are fundamentally flawed. The most important point the two parties have missed is that neither the ruling party nor the administration under it runs the election. And it is not the caretaker government, if there is one, which would conduct the elections either. It is the Election Commission (EC) that organises and conducts the election with the support of the administration. So why these rigid positions?

Take the BNP's position, for example. Once bitten, twice shy, the BNP made a blunder in 2014 but participated in the elections in 2018, only to burn its fingers. The 2018 election was an election that never was. It was an aberration that sapped the Election Commission's credibility and people's interest in politics. Therefore, the BNP is not remiss in thinking that with Awami League in power, a free and fair election is not possible. And none other than the former chief election commissioner (CEC) has very recently admitted that there are challenges in holding the polls under a party government. It would have been a great help had he spelt out what the challenges were that he had faced in his five years in office. It is a sad reflection on our system that while other democracies have elections with the incumbent in charge of the administration without anyone questioning its credibility, we need special dispensation to conduct our parliamentary elections. And this is only because the institutions and agencies in these countries work independently and possess enough spine to resist undue pressure. Thus, the gripe.

But why is the Awami League so unsure of itself as not to accept a neutral dispensation running the administration during the conduct of national elections? It had claimed in 2014, as it does now, that it was riding the crest of popularity with its many achievements. Thus, one may ask: Did it have to resort to the blatant measures and ploys to ensure victory in 2014 and 2018? If one would need a lantern to find BNP leaders during elections, as some Awami League leaders think, then why not relent on your position? The Padma Bridge is a purple patch of the Hasina administration, and should be a vote catcher for the party. So why the uncertainty? Why so many new ordinances to stifle free speech? Why equate the party with the state? Why root for a voting apparatus which has been discarded by most of the leading democracies in the world because of its susceptibility to tampering – the electronic voting machine (EVM)?

Read more

Of Lemon, Soap, Vaseline and EVMs

Participatory elections do not necessarily mean a free and fair election. And we know that. Ultimately, it is the CEC and his commissioners who can make all the difference. An acceptable election depends on the Election Commission's ability to display its grit and resolve, exercise its writ, remain neutral, and be prompt to address complaints and proactive in detecting violations – unlike the former CEC and his team, whose belated reaction to any complaint was its hallmark. The million-dollar question is: Can the new Election Commission absorb the pressure of the ruling party, prevent the government's direct and indirect influence in the election process, and provide a level playing field for everybody? Past experiences in general do not engender confidence in the system.

In the final analysis, there are more compelling reasons for the BNP to participate in the election, and for the Awami League to allow an acceptable, free, fair and participatory election without resorting to the means of the past two. For the BNP, it would not like to be in the political wilderness it has been in the last 10 years. In 2018, everything was done to ensure that the BNP did not get the second highest number of seats and become the major opposition in parliament. Certainly, it deserved to win more than the six seats it did the last time. As for the Awami League, its seriousness in making the next election participatory is demonstrated by the comments of senior party members, including the prime minister. There is a realisation in the ruling party that the kind of elections held in 2014 and 2018 would no longer wash. The next election has to be not only accepted nationally, but internationally too. The question is whether the two can reach an agreement that would include arrangements of holding the Jatiya Sangsad election, making it impervious to the ruling party's influence.

Brig Gen Shahedul Anam Khan, ndc, psc (retd) is a former associate editor of The Daily Star.

The phenomenon of high-ranking bureaucrats joining political parties after retirement is a matter of concern for many citizens. This is because it raises questions about their true loyalty and the integrity of the bureaucracy. When individuals are appointed to serve in government positions, they take an oath to serve the people and uphold the law. However, if they join a political party immediately after retirement, it sends a message that their loyalty may have been divided all along, and that, while serving in the bureaucracy, they may have worked in favour of a certain section of people in power or from within the power structure. And not only that, their subordinates may have also done the same.

To better understand the phenomenon, let us look at the Gaibandha-5 by-election.

The events surrounding the Gaibandha-5 by-election have raised concerns about the integrity of the country's institutions – particularly the Election Commission (EC). The Chief Election Commissioner expressed his frustration with the widespread irregularities that occurred during the by-election, stating that "elections [were] now out of control." The EC suspended the election and announced that it would take legal action against 134 public officials, including a returning officer, one additional deputy commissioner, one executive magistrate, 126 presiding officers, and five sub-inspectors for their involvement in the irregularities.

Read more

Political dialogues: The long road to nowhere

The reason behind taking such an action is simple: these officials did not act as they were supposed to under oath.

During an election, the civil administration, including the bureaucracy and police, are mandated by law to serve under the direct control of the EC. The EC relies on their integrity to successfully hold a free and fair election. However, during the Gaibandha-5 by-election, the opposite occurred. Officials acted as if they were not under oath and did not provide their allegiance to the Commission, resulting in widespread irregularities.

The fact that public officials acted against their oath raises concerns about who they were serving; the people they were supposed to serve under oath, or the party they are associated with? The aftermath of the by-election sends a negative message to the people, creating doubts about the integrity of these officials and the institutions they serve.

The erosion of institutional integrity is a significant issue. It is leading to a loss of faith in the democratic process of the country. When we lose confidence in the integrity of institutions, we become disillusioned with the democratic process

It is not surprising that the EC has not yet taken visible actions against the public officials. The EC is reliant on the civil administration's cooperation, and without it, the Commission cannot act. Unfortunately, this situation is not unique to Bangladesh, and it is not uncommon for public officials to act against their oath, especially when there is political pressure.

The erosion of institutional integrity is a significant issue. It is leading to a loss of faith in the democratic process of the country. When we lose confidence in the integrity of institutions, we become disillusioned with the democratic process. The second round of the Gaibandha-5 constituency election, held on January 3 with only 35 percent voter turnout, and the EC's shift from "out of control" to "fair, disciplined and peaceful manner", proved that people's participation no longer matters. The ruling party candidate won the by-election.

There was a time when nothing could stop people from exercising their voting rights. Blaming the cold for the lower turnout is perhaps nothing but covering up the weaknesses of the constitutional institutions.

All citizens have a responsibility to vote. Even if the outcome seems predetermined, it is essential to exercise the right to vote and make one's voice heard. It is only by participating in the democratic process that citizens can ensure that their elected officials are held accountable and that institutions remain independent and free from political pressure.

The EC is a constitutional body in Bangladesh. Our constitution has awarded the EC with absolute power to control and direct the civil administration during elections. But this is rendered meaningless if the civil administration does not cooperate with the EC, but ends up doing the opposite.

The events surrounding a few recent parliamentary by-elections and local government elections serve as a warning about the erosion of our institutional integrity. What happened after the local government elections was even worse – several elected representatives, including a freedom fighter, were sacked from their positions on questionable grounds.

Their termination was imminent as they had gone against the candidates nominated by their party, won the election, and faced non-cooperation from the civil administration at the local level. Compared to others, the freedom fighter was fortunate enough to get his position back – thanks to a court ruling declaring his termination illegal.

So, can the EC hold a free and fair national election? Under the prevailing conditions, it is nearly impossible. Why? With only nine months left before the national election, the law ministry is still sitting on the EC's proposal to amend the Representation of the People Order, 1972, the regulating law of the national election. It is mentioned under Article 126 of the constitution that it shall be the duty of all executive authorities to assist the EC in the discharging of its functions.

Can the EC do anything if the executive authorities feel that these are just words written on a piece of paper? It cannot.

Read more

US, India, and the election in Bangladesh

These precedents will continue to have serious implications for the integrity of the bureaucracy and the legitimacy of the government's actions. Bureaucracy, civil administration, and law enforcement agencies need to remain impartial and serve the public interest, rather than aligning themselves with political parties.

Much of Bangladesh's recent economic slump is due to public funds being used to benefit mid- and high-ranking executive officials, further exacerbating inequality. But it has worked well in terms of winning their loyalty and confidence for the ruling party, with overall negative consequences for the people and the economy.

Meer Ahsan Habib is a Hubert Humphrey Fellow at Arizona State University. His Twitter handle is @meeriyadh

Since the newly formed interim government has taken charge, emergence of an impartial democratic governance has become the sine qua non for restoration of public trust in the electoral system. Since August 5, in a significant overhaul of the local administration, the interim government dismissed 876 elected representatives nationwide. To fill these positions, administrators were appointed in 61 districts, 495 upazilas, and 330 municipalities, largely replacing those who had served under the previous Awami League (AL) government. In addition to the removal of seven previously appointed municipal administrators, 323 municipal mayors were also dismissed.

The administration is also being shaken up with at least five mid-ranking police officials, who were arbitrarily dismissed or sent into forced resignation during the tenure of AL, being reinstated. The chief justice, five justices, top police officials, and the central bank governor—all have gone into retirement, yet there has been no change in the bedrock of the country's democratic governance i.e., the Bangladesh Election Commission (EC).

Read more

The alterations we need in our Election Commission

Questions have been raised about the current Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Kazi Habibul Awal and his colleagues, following the fall of Sheikh Hasina's government. Despite his overseeing the 2024 general election, widely criticised for irregularities and bias, the CEC continues to hold his position at a time when the growing national sentiment is that a new, impartial EC is essential to restore confidence in the electoral process.

Over the past 53 years, Bangladesh has struggled to build a strong electoral system. While elections overseen by caretaker governments since the transition to parliamentary democracy in 1991 were generally considered to be free, fair, and participative, those conducted under political administrations of the ruling AL often lacked credibility due to interference by the government. Same thing happened when the then ruling BNP tried to manipulate the infamous Magura by-polls in 1994.

The electoral system took a significant turn in 2011 when the Sheikh Hasina-led AL abolished the constitutional requirement for a caretaker government through the 15th amendment. This decision led to a boycott of the 2014 general election by BNP and other opposition parties which was marred by violence, voter suppression, and allegations of government crackdowns on opposition leaders. More than half of the seats i.e. 153 out of 300 were uncontested and won by the single ruling party candidates. From 2014 to 2024, the country's electoral landscape has been defined by a series of controversial elections with poor participation, political repression, and concerns over the state of democracy.

Read more

Of the AL, for the AL, and by the AL

Similarly, under former CEC KM Nurul Huda, the 2018 election marked the introduction of electronic voting machines (EVMs) which became a source of controversy with a turnout of 80 percent with the AL, in alliance with the Jatiya Party (JP), securing over 90 percent of the parliamentary seats. Observers reported significant irregularities, such as voter intimidation, ballot stuffing, and occupation of polling booths, raising serious doubts about the integrity of the electoral process and the role of the EC. In 2020, 42 prominent citizens called on the then President Abdul Hamid to establish a Supreme Judicial Council to investigate allegations of misconduct, including financial corruption, against the EC led by KM Nurul Huda.

In 2023, the EC's widely publicised dialogue with registered parties occurred with many expecting the EC to first enable the BNP to freely decide on participating. Instead, the EC considered its duty fulfilled by simply delivering an invitation to the BNP's empty, locked office. Additionally, TIB published a report on the 12th National Parliament Election criticising EC for failing to ensure fairness, transparency, and competitiveness.

The 2024 general election was widely seen as a repeat of previous polls, with an exceptionally low turnout of 27 percent, and the AL poised for another victory. These issues highlight ongoing concerns about the EC's ability to conduct credible elections, yet the EC seems mostly oblivious of its role in the flawed electoral processes. According to Articles 118(4) and 126 of the Constitution of Bangladesh, along with Article 4 of the Representation of the People Order, 1972, the EC is an independent constitutional body, accountable only to the constitution and relevant laws. Given this, it is crucial for the CEC and the EC led by him to uphold democratic principles.

Read more

How do we describe the upcoming election?

On August 24, the CEC wrote a column for Samakal expressing concerns about the constitutional requirement for the EC to conduct general elections within 90 days, as mandated by Article 123(3)(b) of the constitution. He warned that failure to do so could be considered a grave offense under Article 7A, potentially punishable by death. However, he also acknowledged the impossibility of holding elections within this timeframe under current circumstances, likening the situation to "the sword of Damocles hanging over one's head." Given the complexity of the situation, looming crises, and the fact that elections overseen by the EC in the past 15 years have eroded public trust, he and his colleagues should have resigned immediately without waiting for either a call from the president or any other corner who they would have difficulty ignoring.

The interim government needs to rebuild electoral institutions starting with an independent election commission free from political influence. This is an opportunity to restore citizens' trust in elections by creating a sustainable, transparent electoral process that puts power back in the hands of the people. Hence, it is difficult to understand why the current CEC and his colleagues are not submitting resignations as opposed to being asked to do so. Do they really believe that any further election will be held under their stewardship? Or are the salary, benefits, perks and privileges they enjoy too good to be not enjoyed until shown the door?

Prof Syed Munir Khasru is chairman of The Institute for Policy, Advocacy, and Governance (IPAG), an international think tank. He can be reached via www.syedmunirkhasru.org.

Views expressed in this article are the author's own.

Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.

Chief Election Commissioner Kazi Habibul Awal said if he had been made the CEC of New Zealand or Britain, he could have finished the election by sitting on a chair sipping tea.

He said this while inaugurating the voters' list update programme-2022 at Savar in Dhaka today (May 20, 2022), reports our local correspondent.

"I told my colleagues that if I were the Chief Election Commissioner of New Zealand or Britain, I could have finished the election by sitting on a chair and sipping tea," he said.

"In many countries of the world, elections/voting rights are exercised, as you know, and I also know that no violence happened there. Everyone stands in queues and everyone goes and exercises their rights to vote," he added.

"I didn't have any kind of stress, and would not suffer from high blood pressure. But the situation in Bangladesh makes us stressed during the elections. We have to be careful," said the CEC.

"The Election Commission alone can never make an election a success. But here those who are employees of the Republic, such as police administration, and district administration have to play a very important role during the elections," he also said.

"Here, however, we have a big challenge. Exercising the voting right is the big challenge," he said.

"Yesterday I read a report of violence during elections in a newspaper. We want competition and a participatory election. But sometimes violence takes place in the vote. Chase and counter chases happened. A writer said that this is not our election crisis, it is our cultural crisis," he went on saying.

"How our culture has developed that we have to commit occurrence during elections. In many cases, this makes us sad. We need to get out of this exercise and maybe it will take some time," he added.

Md Humayun Kabir Khandker, EC secretary, also spoke at the event and called upon people, local government representatives, and administration to come forward for the cooperation of the staff engaged in the updating process of the voters' list.