BNP Senior Joint Secretary General Rizvi Ahmed today termed the much-talked-about Rampal power plant as an “anti-state project” saying his party will remain vocal against implementation of it.

“It’s an anti-state project. It is going to be implemented to destroy the Sundarbans in a planned way,” Rizvi brought the allegation while addressing a human chain formed in front of the National Press Club this afternoon.

Blaming India for devising the project plan, Rizvi said, “The neighbouring country is insisting Sheikh Hasina to implement the project near the Sundarbans without allowing such project on its own soil.”

Meanwhile, the World Heritage Committee of Unesco has withdrawn its objection to the setting up of Rampal power plant at its current site near the Sundarbans, claims the Bangladesh foreign ministry.

Referring to the issue, Rizvi said, “It does not matter whatever is said by the foreign organisation. We don’t want Rampal power plant. It’s devastating.”

Hailing the reports of Human Rights Watch published over the enforced disappearances, Rizvi said national election under a supportive polls-time government is needed immediately to get rid of the situation.

With the national election still two weeks away, many national and international observers have already termed it as a farce or "staged election", and it is easy to see why. One of the key features of any election is the ability of voters to select the winner. If voters are not presented with any real options to choose from, then arguably the most important purpose of an election is defeated. That is why we saw the ruling party scrambling to field dummy candidates or bargaining with the Jatiya Party to make up for the absence of the BNP and other like-minded parties, thus giving the election some sort of legitimacy.

Let us not forget that the idea of fielding dummy candidates this time—we have, of course, heard about it in previous elections also—came from the very top of the Awami League. So, if the ruling party itself is offering voters the option to choose from either a candidate of the Awami League or a dummy, what real options do voters have? And what message are they to receive from the ones conducting this election—namely, the Election Commission—who, knowing this, is still going ahead with the election? Are people to believe that the EC is conducting it in the interest of voters? Of course not.

Read more

Why do other parties need AL’s concessions to win election?

The EC asking the home ministry to take steps to prevent political rallies and processions of all kinds, except for electoral campaigns, from December 18 till polling day, also makes it complicit in suppressing protests against what a number of opposition parties see as being a farcical election. Interestingly, earlier on that same day, the Awami League's general secretary urged the commission and law enforcement agencies to take a strong stance against forces that the ruling party saw were against the elections—mainly the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. Such a step to stop political rallies and programmes, it can be argued, is unconstitutional, as it denies political parties in the opposition camp the right to assembly, the right to protest, the right to movement and the right to free expression.

As concerning as the use of such a tactic may be, it hasn't been the only one used to set up what seems to be a staged and one-sided election. Last month, The Guardian reported how Bangladesh saw "full prisons and false charges" due to the crackdown on the opposition. Following such "a ruthless crackdown on the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party" in the run-up to the elections, it noted how few "believe the election will be free, fair or remotely democratic." This strategy, according to The New York Times, is leading to "Bangladesh's multiparty democracy…being methodically strangled in crowded courtrooms."

The expediated trials leading to the convictions of hundreds of opposition leaders and activists further validate such apprehensions. For example, on December 11, at least 42 BNP members and those of its infamous allies—Jamaat-e-Islami—were convicted in four cases. Between August-December, 961 opposition leaders and activists were reportedly sentenced to imprisonment in 62 cases in Dhaka. What makes these especially controversial is that convictions were apparently made without considering any independent witnesses or only with police deposition, and defence lawyers further alleged that less than half of the prosecution witnesses were heard. Furthermore, it must be noted that such speedy disposal of cases is unusual in a country where justice delivery has become particularly slow. This fact, and our previous history of witnessing politically motivated cases right before elections, indicate that opposition leaders are again being targeted and kept out of the electoral fray.

Read more

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

In that regard, the recent comments made by Awami League presidium member and agriculture minister Abdur Razzaque, that jailed BNP men were offered freedom if the party agreed to contest the polls, is telling. Although AL later tried to play it down and its general secretary said it was Razzaque's personal opinion, it lends further credence to the public perception that all these arrests and convictions are being made in trumped up cases for political reasons. Additionally, it raises two very important questions: 1) If we are currently in a situation where the ruling party can decide to arrest and release thousands of opposition leaders and activists, is it really conducive for a free and fair election? And 2) what has happened to the independence of the legal system?

Such an admission and the underlying state of affairs—for example, since 2009, 1,37,569 cases have been filed against 49,80,826 BNP leaders and activists—show that the Awami League is bent on ensuring its grip over power by using the full might of the state machinery. What is missing in all of this is the role of the citizens, who have all but lost their right to vote. As a result, government officials across the board are no longer accountable to the people and so, the people no longer have any say in how the state is being run, nor how the elections should be conducted. So, even though it's been the opposition that has mainly been on the receiving end of the government's high-handedness and the ruling party's vitriol, ultimately, it will be the general people who are likely to be the biggest losers of the elections.

Eresh Omar Jamal is a journalist at The Daily Star. His X handle is @EreshOmarJamal

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.

BNP today alleged that the charge of country’s independent territorial sovereignty has been handed over to India through signing the memorandum of understandings on defence areas.

"Bangladesh defence system has now been turned into made-in-India one," said Rizvi Ahmed, BNP’s senior joint secretary general while addressing a human chain in front of the Jatiya Press Club in Dhaka.

Bangladesh Jatiya Dal organised the programme demanding government assurance of fair share of water of 54 common rivers with India.

“April 8 will be considered as a black day in Bangladesh history as the MoUs were signed on the day," he said, alleging that PM Sheikh Hasina signed the defence MoU to appease India.

He claimed that the country's people have turned down the defence MoUs between the two countries signed Saturday.

"The country's people have no consent to the defence MoUs and they won't allow those to be implemented. We'll set up our security system in our own style," Rizvi added.

He called upon people from all walks to life to get united to save the country's independence and sovereignty.

Bangladesh and India on Saturday signed 36 bilateral documents, covering diverse areas of cooperation, including economic defence cooperation, power and peaceful use of nuclear energy, after official talks between Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her Indian counterpart Narendra Modi.

That the BNP chief Khaleda Zia would not be directly involved in her party's activities or politics has been a moot point since February 2018, when she was jailed on corruption charges. BNP's failed movement to release Khaleda from jail seemed to further ensure that her days in politics had indeed come to an end – although the matter has made headlines recently, thanks to the contradictory comments made by the ruling Awami League leaders. With the next parliamentary election less than a year away, the matter has understandably gained much attention.

Khaleda Zia's legal rights notwithstanding, the BNP, which is effectively the main opposition camp in Bangladesh, smells a rat in all this. Party insiders suggest that the ruling party is intentionally reviving the issue as a topic of debate. The ruling party leaders, on their part, counter that they have no intention of bringing the issue to the fore, but have just explained what is written in the executive order on the basis of which the 77-year-old BNP chief walked out from jail on health grounds.

Read more

Debate if Khaleda can do Politics: Her health more pressing question

The debate on whether Khaleda could come back to politics began when senior Awami League lawmaker Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim said on January 26 that she had been released from prison "with an undertaking" not to get involved in politics. It took a new turn when Law Minister Anisul Huq and Agriculture Minister Abdur Razzaque said she could indeed make a comeback to the country's political scene, but not contest elections, only to be countered by Information Minister Hasan Mahmud and Road Transport and Bridges Minister Obaidul Quader.

Amid this debate, the BNP has decided to be extra cautious. With the election round the corner, any mistake could cost them dearly as the party has been out of power for three consecutive terms. In the last two elections, they took different approaches that brought them the same outcome: nothing.

There are at least four possible scenarios for which the BNP suspects the Awami League has intentionally revived the Khaleda Zia issue.

First, the BNP has been rather successful in their street campaign to push its 10-point charter of demands, including a general election under a non-partisan interim administration. Many were sceptical about the party's organisational strength to wage any such campaign. Many even mocked the party for thinking of a campaign on the streets. But the BNP proved everyone wrong and has been running a successful campaign with wide public support, challenging the ruling party with huge rallies. The recent discussion about Khaleda, according to BNP insiders, is to throw the party off its game; the street campaign will be defused as leaders would get busy talking about the party chief.

Second, there is a "pressure" on the government to hold an inclusive and credible election. Without the participation of the opposition BNP, the next election would not be an inclusive one. So, the issue of Khaleda's engagement in active politics could be a ploy to get the BNP to come to the table for talks.

Third, the party fears that if Khaleda Zia becomes active in politics, the government may suspend the executive order that allowed the former premier to get out of jail. The government might claim that since Khaleda is active in politics, she must be in good health, and hence must go back to jail.

Fourth, since Khaleda has been in jail, her elder son and the party's Acting Chairman Tarique Rahman has been at the helm of the party. The current campaign has also been taking place under his leadership. Those who don't like Tarique's leadership within the BNP, however, have no option but to go along.

Read more

Protest Programmes: BNP plans to get back momentum

The party, so long as it is under Tarique's leadership, is adamant about not joining the polls under the Sheikh Hasina government. So, if that section of leaders brought Khaleda back to politics, it would create enough of a buzz for the old guards to rally around the former prime minister. That would challenge Tarique's leadership within the party and, at the same time, it would be possible to send Khaleda back to jail, and split the party and bring a section of the party to the election to make it inclusive.

Whatever the case may be, the BNP leadership has decided to remain quiet for now. What is almost certain, however, is that in politics, one does not get a second chance to seize the initiative. And the BNP appears to have lost its chance. The party leaders could well have tested the waters with a countermove soon after the law and agriculture ministers' comments. What if they had mentioned that Khaleda would speak to the press shortly? Or that she would address a public meeting remotely from her home? What would have happened? At best, she would have had half an hour that would be the most covered and most watched news event in quite some time. At worst, she would be sent to jail and the BNP would have another reason to take to the streets with a stronger resolve for the 10-point demand. What is certain is that it would have tested the ruling Awami League's sincerity or resolve.

The BNP's current risk-averse behaviour is not conducive to running a successful campaign. Electoral politics needs quite a lot more pluck.

Mohammad Al-Masum Molla is chief reporter at The Daily Star.