We appreciate what appears to be the first sign of flexibility in the administration about forming a poll-time government ahead of the national election. The prime minister on Monday hinted that a poll-time government with parties having representation in parliament could be formed. By the same logic, however, she rejected the possibility of the BNP, whose MPs had resigned from parliament last December, being a part of it. She also ruled out any dialogue with BNP as it leads a nationwide anti-government movement.

Read more

Without support from bureaucracy, EC can’t hold fair elections

There are a number of takeaways from the PM's statement. First of all, the apparent willingness to bring opposition elements in the government marks a departure from the bellicose posturing that we have come to expect from ruling-party politicians. But that hardly rises to the level expected in the present environment of distrust, with BNP edged out of the process on a technicality. Also, the PM's tone, alluding to "our generosity" for forming such a government, leaves doubt about how impactful it might be. One thing that we don't want to see is token representation without real power.

Read more

Column by Mahfuz Anam: Who runs the country?

Secondly, BNP remains the biggest opposition party regardless of its representation or lack thereof in parliament. So, how judicious is it to exclude it from a potential poll-time government or any dialogue on said government and the election in general? Dialogue at the top level may not be on the cards right now, but mid-ranked leaders from both parties can, and should, start the process. Dialogue is essential for any solution to the current political impasse.

Read more

Is the EC fighting an unwinnable war?

Thirdly, formation of a poll-time government is but a means to an end, which is to ensure that those in charge have the trust of all political elements and the general public so that they can deliver a fair and credible election. So how should that government be formed? The PM offers a way, but it cannot be the only way. Any poll-time government without the representation of main political elements will not solve the pressing issues we face. Also, how will it perform? Will it be unidimensional where everything is decided from the top, as it is now? These things must be considered going forward.

As the chief election commissioner repeated on Monday, the commission alone cannot hold a fair election without the help of the government. Without taking away from the responsibility of the EC, we think that some sort of a credible power structure in the driving seat is a crucial precondition for any fair election.

On April 23, we ran a report on how 100,500 electronic voting machines (EVMs), out of 150,000 total, worth Tk 3,825 crore, will soon be gutted as they "are no longer usable," according to an Election Commission official. These machines, with an official lifespan of 10 years, were bought in 2018 just before the election that year, at a cost of Tk 2.35 lakh each—11 times more expensive than the EVMs used in India. As guaranteed, the EVMs purchased by Bangladesh should have functioned at least until 2028.

But the EVMs next door have a different story. Right now, India is holding the biggest election ever in the world with 969 million registered voters. The elections began on April 19 and will be held in seven phases over a six-week period and across more than a million polling stations. The result will be announced on June 4. All of the nearly a billion voters will cast their ballots using the 5.5 million EVMs that are being used throughout this massive country.

Read more

EVM neglect is EC's failure

So what explains the dramatically opposite trajectories in the use of EVMs between the two neighbouring countries? India, after achieving political consensus on the use of EVMs in 1998 and through many years of trial and error, reached 100 percent use of these machines in 2004 in all its constituencies. But why are we dumping our EVMs into the gutter less than six years after their purchase? By doing so, we are setting back—and we don't know for how long—any possibility of using EVMs in future polls, which is essential for the modernisation of our election process.

Why did the EVM experiment in Bangladesh fall on its face?

There is, of course, the overriding political atmosphere of suspicion and hatred, as well as a culture of never accepting what the other side does. But on the technical side, too, there were fundamental flaws in the EVM project formulation, evaluation, and monitoring that have led to the present disaster.

First, let us delve into the issue of why our EVMs should cost 11 times more than those used in India. It was said that ours were of higher technical capability and had features that others didn't. Voters never came to know what those special features were, but did the Election Commission (EC) know? If yes, did they carry out thorough technical evaluation before approving the machines?

Read more

EVMs and a mind-reading election commissioner

One key feature of the Indian EVM is its paper trail, or the voter verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT). So, when a vote is cast, the machine prints out a slip containing the serial number, name, and symbol of the candidate, which is displayed for seven seconds and then automatically drops into a sealed box. This serves as a confirmation to the voter that the machine has correctly registered his/her vote and also acts as a printed record that can be used to verify voting in case there are questions or contestations. The VVPAT feature greatly helped India to gain public confidence in the EVM process, while its absence did the very opposite in our case. Why didn't our EC insist on having this feature?

Moreover, did the EC do its due diligence before accepting the EVMs, especially as it was costing 11 times higher than the comparable Indian ones?

There is also the question whether the EC did enough to gain public trust in EVM use. The prevailing suspicion that EVMs could be manipulated remains deeply etched in the public mind. The EC should have realised that casting a ballot is a precious right and an exercise of power by each voter, which one would be reluctant to relinquish to a machine unless s/he had full faith on its reliability. But did the EC do enough to gain that crucial public confidence? Why weren't more technical teams, IT specialists, and poll experts utilised to engage with general voters and remove the doubts that continue to gnaw at the public mind as to the dependability of these EVMs? There should have been far more public display regarding the workings of these machines as well as open debate about their capabilities.

Without such outreach to gain public confidence, the EC should not have proceeded to buy so many of these machines. There should have been many more pilot projects with smaller numbers of both voters and EVMs, and through such a process a breakthrough could perhaps have been achieved. If Indian voters could have been won over in favour of the EVMs, why not ours, too, where diversity is so much less?

Perhaps the most damaging and utterly absurd aspect of the EC's project was that there was no provision to store these EVMs when not in use. Can there be anything more ridiculous? When the first batch of 25,000 EVMs were delivered in 2018, the question should have immediately occurred to the EC as to where to store them. Without that crucial question being resolved, the EC ordered more of the machines and in the subsequent years—2019 and 2020—the whole lot of 150,000 EVMs were bought. So, to put it bluntly: EVMs were bought at 11 times the price they are next door and then, when not in use, they have literally been thrown into premises—such as schools, colleges and EC upazila offices—that are inadequate to store these technically sophisticated machines. Temperature, dust, and humidity control are the most essential preconditions for EVMs' preservation, and none of this was ensured. All this was done with the full knowledge that these machines would soon become unusable, as they have now become. The crudity of it all boggles the mind.

Read more

How do we get the goons out of the EVM booths?

As a society under law, shouldn't we be able to hold some people responsible for such blatant waste of public money? Is it those who proposed the EVM project, those who evaluated it, or those who approved it? In a sense, all should be responsible. But in fact, nobody is. The way our administrative procedures are formulated prevents clearly identifying who should be held responsible in case of failure. This, coupled with the practice of never holding anyone responsible, has created a culture of spending public money without any regard for accountability. Every year, the media runs hundreds of stories about waste of public money but no accountability comes out of it. The office of the Comptroller and Auditor General publishes hundreds of well-researched reports annually, exposing cases of public money being squandered. But these reports ultimately gather dust. The fact that no official has ever been held responsible or punished—especially the senior ones—has created an environment of endorsing corruption. This also feeds into the present culture of impunity among the rich and powerful.

Shouldn't the EC hold its own investigation as to how the EVM disaster occurred, and what can be done to prevent such a failure in the future. With nearly a billion voters, India has achieved 100 percent usage of EVMs and we, with only 120 million voters, are abandoning it, with all the implications of continuing the controversies of ballot stuffing, midnight voting and the rest. The fiasco with the EVMs has created further doubt in the public mind as to the capabilities of our EC to hold free and fair elections in the near future.

Mahfuz Anam is editor and publisher of The Daily Star.

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.

The 1970 Pakistan election was considered the "fairest and cleanest" election in Pakistan's history, which paved the way for Bangladesh's independence from Pakistan. However, Bangladesh has failed to institutionalise a sound electoral process in the 53 years since independence. Even though all elections held under caretaker governments (CG) were termed as mostly free and fair, elections held under political governments lacked credibility; some were even considered farcical. The key reason is political interference into the workings of election administration by successive political governments since 1972. To stay in power, the ruling class in most cases conducts purely decorative and ritualalistic elections denying independence to the Bangladesh Election Commission (BEC) and politicising other institutions with electoral responsibilities such as law enforcement agencies, local administration, judiciary, etc. aiming to manipulate election results.

The democracy-loving people of Bangladesh, where elections are festivals, are waiting to exercise their franchise in the 13th parliamentary elections. However, to ensure requisite institutional conditions for holding the next elections, the interim government needs ample time to rebuild Bangladesh's electoral institutions. The interim government and the new election commission, which is expected to be formed soon, must address the following key immediate issues not only to guide Bangladesh towards conducting genuine democratic elections but also to render the commission a professional citizens' organisation.

Read more

The AL cannot validate this farce of an election with intimidation

First, the country needs an independent election commission (EC) free from political intervention. The first and foremost step towards an independent EC is the recruitment of credible and non-partisan authorities with a demonstrated commitment to democracy and accountability to citizens. However, the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Appointment Act, 2022 is incomplete, as it lacks recruitment criteria for commissioners, excludes citizen scrutiny, and does not ensure transparency. Moreover, the loopholes around this law allow the ruling class to easily recruit loyal people as election commissioners. Therefore, the interim government should engage an expert pool to review and propose amendments to the law to ensure it is comprehensive, adheres to international best practices, and ensures the recruitment of commissioners capable of neutrally performing their functions.

Second, no EC around the world can conduct credible elections alone. They need support from various institutions, including the police and civil service. During elections, the EC should emerge as the de facto government authority on election administration, assuming total control over police and bureaucracy, and cutting its link with the political government completely. Political neutrality of electoral institutions is paramount. However, due to blatant politicisation of state institutions, some police personnel in particular played a blatant role in ensuring victory of ruling party candidates, including widespread ballot stuffing in multiple elections held under a political government. In order to neutralise temporary poll officials, including police, the IG should amend the Election Officers (Special Regulations) Act, 1991 so that no temporary poll officials, including returning officers and police, can play a biased role in any future elections.

Third, the EC should become a citizens' organisation. In genuine democratic elections, citizens are "the ultimate controlling power." Therefore, EC-decision making must be based on citizens' voices to make the EC "of the people, by the people and for the people." The new EC should conduct its work transparently, including adopting a transparency guideline so that Bangladesh can benefit from an EC that is fully accountable to citizens.

Read more

Bangladesh's election formality is over. What’s next?

Fourth, an election cannot be termed as credible if opposition parties do not participate and if there is a lack of qualified candidates running for office. The UN declared that "political contestants (parties, candidates and supporters of positions on referenda) have vested interests in the electoral process through their rights to be elected and to participate directly in government." In Bangladesh, there are allegations that some qualified political parties were denied registration with the EC, while parties that did not meet the registration criteria were enlisted. Lack of participation of all qualified political parties raises questions about the credibility of elections. Therefore, both the IG and the EC, before the next election should create equal opportunity for all political parties to participate in elections. 

Fifth, election observation in Bangladesh has never been professionalised due to official and unofficial political intervention of the ruling party and EC restrictions. While election observers are a key electoral stakeholder, the EC never established professional relationships with observer organisations. Instead, many credible observers were labelled as "politically biased" when they published credible election observation reports. 

There are many examples of political, election-time governments thwarting effective election monitoring by pressuring election observers in multiple ways. Practices that negatively impacted past observations efforts include NGO Affairs Bureau cancelling previously approved funds for observing organisations to prevent them from carrying out their mandates; intelligence agencies subjecting election observers to intense scrutiny, which discouraged observers from conducting election monitoring; BEC issuing credentials during the night preceding election day, preventing observers from traveling to their desired constituency, and restricting observers' movement.

Read more

How do we describe the upcoming election?

Due to such barriers, most credible organisations stopped observing elections in Bangladesh. The IG and the BEC should develop a strategy not only to professionalise election observation but also to build a culture of accrediting credible election observation organisations as an integral part of elections. 

Elections are of paramount importance to a country's quality of democratic governance. They are the means through which people voice their preferences and choose their representatives. I strongly believe the presence of an interim government creates an opportunity to bring elections back to the citizens of Bangladesh, including establishing a sustainable electoral mechanism which no longer change the rules of the game to engineer electoral outcomes.

Dr Md Abdul Alim is an elections specialist, currently working as principal director with Democracy International, and previously served as director of the Election Working Group.

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.

The Election Commission is going to buy two lakh Electronic Voting Machines for the next national polls, spending more than 10 times what India paid to obtain its EVMs.

An EVM in India costs about Rs 20,000, said an EC official on the condition of anonymity.

When the EC bought 1.5 lakh EVMs from  Bangladesh Machine Tools Factory (BMTF) in 2018, each machine cost Tk 2.3 lakh, the official said.

This time, the outlay is bound to be more due to the appreciation of the dollar, the official pointed out adding that a development project proposal involving Tk 7,500-Tk 8,000 crore was being prepared.

More than four years back, the EC bought the EVMs under a Tk 3,825-crore project.

The base price of an EVM was $2,387 (about Tk 2,26,842 in today's money); another Tk 25,000 had to be paid for its accessories.

Last time, there was no value-added tax on the final price of the EVMs but this time there might be taxes, which would increase the cost further, the official said, adding that the base price would remain the same.

Asked why the Bangladeshi device was more expensive than that of many countries including India, EVM Project Director Syed Raquibul Hasan said, "A Tata car does not cost the same here as in India.

"You can't compare our EVMs with those of any other country. In our EVMs, we have added features like a fingerprint matching system, audit card, polling card, and other safety and security measures. The Indian EVM has no such features.

"If a fingerprint scanner and other accessories were added, what will be the cost of an Indian EVM?" Hasan said.

 Asked why the EC has not floated any national or international tender for the EVMs, which might have yielded competitive bidding, Hasan said, "Only BMTF can provide the specific machine."

BMTF is a commercial plant of the Bangladesh Army. The state-owned enterprise has the capacity to deliver two lakh EVMs ahead of the next general election likely to be held in late December next year or early January 2024, according to Hasan.

The move to buy the additional EVMs comes on the back of the EC's August-23 decision to go for electronic voting in up to 150 constituencies in the polls despite major opposition parties' objection to the use of the devices.

The EC has 1.5 lakh EVMs that can be used in 70-80 constituencies at one go in the next polls.

The development project proposal now being prepared includes the setting up of 10 warehouses in 10 regions, recruiting manpower and training them to handle the devices, and buying vehicles for transporting the EVMs.

The warehouses will have foolproof security, firefighting equipment and temperature control for the proper preservation of the EVMs.

The three-storied warehouses would be on 40 kathas of land with more than 60,000 square feet of space to keep around 45,000 EVMs.

"We will need money to buy or acquire land and to have modern facilities to store the machines," Hasan said. Campaigns would be required to make people aware of the EVM use and dispel misconceptions.

The EC is yet to choose the constituencies where EVMs will be used in the next general election.

"This will be finalised when the election schedule is fixed," said an EC official.

EVMs would mostly be used in the urban seats with smooth transportation and also where the devices were earlier used for different elections, the official added.

EVMs were first used in the 2018 parliamentary election.

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.