The High Court today directed the Election Commission to allocate BNP’s election symbol “Sheaf of Paddy” to its four candidates in place of other four rival contenders who were earlier allocated the same symbol.
Kamrun Nahar Shirin will get “Sheaf of Paddy” in place of Monjurul Islam Bimal for Natore-1, Abdul Hamid Dabliu will get “Sheaf of Paddy” in place of SA Kabir Jinnah for Manikganj-1, Mostafizur Rahman will get “Sheaf of Paddy” instead of Khalek Chowdhury for Naogaon-1 and Masuda Momin will get “Sheaf of Paddy” in place of Abdul Muhith Talukder, Deputy Attorney General Motaher Hossain Sazu told The Daily Star.
He said Monjurul, Jinnah, Khalek and Muhith cannot contest the December 30 election following the HC orders, he said, adding that they can, however, move appeals before the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court against the HC orders.
The HC stayed for three months the EC’s decisions to allocate “Sheaf of Paddy” to Monjurul, Jinnah, Khalek and Muhith and issued separate rules asking the EC and government to explain in four weeks why the EC’s decisions should not be declared illegal.
The bench of Justice JBM Hassan and Justice Md Khairul Alam came up with the orders and rules following separate writ petitions filed by Kamrun Nahar, Abdul Hamid, Mostafizur and Masuda challenging the EC’s decisions.
The writ petitioners said in their petitions that BNP nominated them first for contesting the December 30 general election.
But the EC allocated “Sheaf of Paddy” to their rival candidates in violation of the Representation of People’s Order (RPO), they said in the petitions.
The High Court today directed the Election Commission to allocate BNP’s election symbol “Sheaf of Paddy” to its four candidates in place of other four rival contenders who were earlier allocated the same symbol.
Kamrun Nahar Shirin will get “Sheaf of Paddy” in place of Monjurul Islam Bimal for Natore-1, Abdul Hamid Dabliu will get “Sheaf of Paddy” in place of SA Kabir Jinnah for Manikganj-1, Mostafizur Rahman will get “Sheaf of Paddy” instead of Khalek Chowdhury for Naogaon-1 and Masuda Momin will get “Sheaf of Paddy” in place of Abdul Muhith Talukder, Deputy Attorney General Motaher Hossain Sazu told The Daily Star.
He said Monjurul, Jinnah, Khalek and Muhith cannot contest the December 30 election following the HC orders, he said, adding that they can, however, move appeals before the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court against the HC orders.
The HC stayed for three months the EC’s decisions to allocate “Sheaf of Paddy” to Monjurul, Jinnah, Khalek and Muhith and issued separate rules asking the EC and government to explain in four weeks why the EC’s decisions should not be declared illegal.
The bench of Justice JBM Hassan and Justice Md Khairul Alam came up with the orders and rules following separate writ petitions filed by Kamrun Nahar, Abdul Hamid, Mostafizur and Masuda challenging the EC’s decisions.
The writ petitioners said in their petitions that BNP nominated them first for contesting the December 30 general election.
But the EC allocated “Sheaf of Paddy” to their rival candidates in violation of the Representation of People’s Order (RPO), they said in the petitions.
Related News
Body:
The passing of the Representation of the People Order (Amendment) Bill, 2023 in parliament is an extremely worrying development. At a time when we are all looking forward to a free and fair election – which is presupposed by the independence of the Election Commission – the passage of the bill, which will reduce the power of the EC to cancel polls, will only dampen the possibility of it being free and fair. On the face of it, the message is obvious: the rule has been passed to restrain the EC.
Already as it exists through law and practice, the EC is hamstrung in many ways. For example, even though the law says that during elections, the administration is supposed to work under the EC, this is only on paper; in reality, it does not happen at all. The chief election commissioner himself has spoken about it. And it has been widely reported on and discussed as well. Now, the EC's hands have been further tied legally.
Specifically, there are two aspects in the amendment that are worrying. The first is the curtailment of the EC's power to suspend polls. The law minister has justified the move by saying that suspending polls in an entire constituency over disturbances in some polling stations is "undemocratic." But what happens if irregularities occur in the majority of polling centres? Will the EC have to stamp its approval just because voting could happen without irregularities in some centres? The amendment takes the same problem to the other extreme. Moreover, the law minister's claim seems to give the impression that the EC would just whimsically suspend polls. Surely, under ideal circumstances, the EC would suspend polls only if it deemed it absolutely necessary.
The second issue is the curtailment of the EC's mandate to suspend polls from during the election period – which is typically about 40 days from when the election schedule is announced to the election day – to only on the "polling day." So, from around 40 days, the EC's power to suspend polls has been reduced to only one day and that also only in the troubled centres. But what happens if large-scale irregularities happen before the officially declared election day, which has blatantly taken place before?
Again, these are clear indications that the bill has been passed to constrain the EC's operating capacity. Given the history of our elections and timidity of ECs and their commissioners, it has made the prospect of free and fair elections further improbable.
Body:
BNP Standing Committee Member Mirza Abbas today dismissed the notion of a "second independence", asserting that such claims undermine the historic Liberation War of 1971.
He said that while the nation has faced struggles over the years, its true independence was won through the sacrifices of the martyrs in 1971 and must be upheld with unity and vigilance.
He made these remarks on the morning of Independence Day after paying tribute to the martyrs at the National Memorial.
"First of all, I remember the proclaimer of independence, martyr President Ziaur Rahman, who fought from within the country and liberated it. Even after 54 years of independence, we lost the taste of true freedom in the middle. We got it again after the 5th," he said.
He honoured the martyrs of 1971 who sacrificed their lives for freedom and expressed condolences to their surviving family members. On behalf of BNP leaders Khaleda Zia and Tarique Rahman, he extended greetings to the nation.
Reflecting on recent events, Mirza Abbas said, "We have just got a new taste of democracy by driving away a new form of oppression through the student movement in July and August."
He criticised those referring to the events of 2024 as the "second independence," asserting that such terminology diminishes the significance of the 1971 Liberation War. "Those who say this want to shorten today's Independence Day; they had no role in the independence of 1971. Therefore, they want to diminish this day," he added.
"I want prayers for national leader Khaleda Zia and will seek prayers from Allah so that we can maintain this independence, so that our next generation can uphold this independence," he said.
Addressing political dynamics, Mirza Abbas stated that while different parties have their ideological stances, this does not equate to disunity.
He emphasised that if a time comes when greater national unity is required to protect independence and sovereignty, the people of Bangladesh will unite. "Now, we may be talking differently for party ideological interests, but when the need arises, the people of Bangladesh will be united," he said.
Regarding the assurance from the chief advisor about elections in December, he expressed trust in that commitment. "Every political party in Bangladesh is an opponent. I do not want to believe that elections will not be held," he concluded.
Body:
Going solely by its public statements, an interesting aspect of BNP's activities since the July uprising has been its search for—and interaction with—new adversaries, in the absence of the one it fought against for so long. As new forces emerge on the scene, BNP, driven partly by post-uprising realities and partly by an abiding sense of victimhood, has increasingly found itself at odds with former allies, new parties, student leaders, the chief adviser and his cabinet colleagues, and even media houses critical of its unruly activists. And it has sought to use these conflicts to come out stronger. What's interesting about it is how unchanged BNP's manner of engagement has remained despite the political changeover in August, often adopting an adversarial tone that feels too eager at times.
In his seminal work on the politics of enemies, Canadian historian Michael Ignatieff explains that when politicians target their adversaries using inflammatory rhetoric, it is not necessarily true that they are merely representing their constituents' feelings or responding to injustices and societal divisions. "The truth may be darker: it may be a language game not to represent grievance, but to create it, and to polarise for the sake of political advantage." However, as the largest party at present—and one many expect to win the next national election—BNP's adversarial politics hurts more because it was expected to lead a new culture of politics, with a new political language that seeks mediation rather than confrontation.
Be that as it may, where it gets particularly disturbing is when BNP brings its combative approach to the state reform drive, which the nation hopes will be the catalyst for transformational change in the country. BNP's stance on reforms has long been one of confusion and mixed messages. On March 16, however, it seemed to take it a step too far. Speaking at an iftar programme at Dhaka Medical College, senior BNP leader Mirza Abbas said, rather ominously, "We will not easily accept any reforms dictated by their [interim government's] hands or pens. If they carry out reforms, we will make corrections. BNP, in collaboration with other political parties, will determine those corrections and present them to the nation. We will not accept the so-called reforms led by the so-called intellectuals who are not even citizens of this country."
BNP must recognise that, besides electoral changes, there are other reforms that are of equal priority. Our painful history of political violence and corruption demands that some key changes be made—at least in the judiciary and police force—to ensure Bangladesh doesn't return to the pre-July status quo after elections. The idea that this may not happen is both naïve and dangerous.
This statement is striking for two reasons. First, it outright dismisses the proposals from various reform commissions which, by the way, are with the political parties for review. Second, it openly questions the legitimacy of those who prepared the proposals and are in talks with stakeholders, including the BNP, to achieve consensus on the nature and extent of reforms. But if this is how BNP wants to navigate this crucial phase—by pre-emptively rejecting expert proposals, disparaging those involved, or accusing the "unelected" government of trying to favour certain parties—what was the point of all the efforts over the last seven months? The non-citizen jibe, likely aimed at the National Consensus Commission Vice-Chairman Ali Riaz, who also heads the Constitution Reform Commission, was particularly insensitive. Despite BNP being very much on the inside and having the ability to impact outcome through the ongoing dialogue, such public outbursts create confusion about what it truly wants.
Yes, not everything said to rally party loyalists should be taken at face value. But BNP's reaction cycle—from insisting that elections and reforms should progress in tandem to demanding no reforms beyond those related to elections—is well-documented. The party has itself complained that its commitment to reforms is being unfairly questioned, but stopped short of considering whether it is somehow contributing to this perception. Instead, it appears more interested in its own 31-point charter, which largely consists of broad visions. All this suggests BNP's growing alienation from the aspirations for structural change through the ongoing reform drive. While acting chairman Tarique Rahman's statement on Wednesday—warning that extremists and fascists could again "bury democracy" and expressing BNP's commitment to maintaining the country's secular character—is laudable, it's the grunt work of reform-making where its commitment, and support, are most needed. Right now, its critical stance isn't helping. Ali Riaz appeared to hint as much on Thursday when he stated that both internal and external forces are trying to "obstruct the reform process."
BNP must recognise that, besides electoral changes, there are other reforms that are of equal priority. Our painful history of political violence and corruption demands that some key changes be made—at least in the judiciary and police force—to ensure Bangladesh doesn't return to the pre-July status quo after elections. The idea that this may not happen is both naïve and dangerous. To expect a political government to honour its commitment to reforms is like expecting it to honour its election manifesto, and we all know how faithful past ruling parties were to their manifestos. There must be at least some binding mechanisms or safeguards in place to ensure that the reform drive does not derail after elections. One way, as suggested by a columnist in this daily, would be for political parties to "thrash out a common minimum reform programme (CMRP)—a set of core reforms based on the max-min principle, where the maximum number of parties agree on a minimum set of urgent measures." This is precisely what the National Consensus Commission can help achieve, if given proper support.
If the BNP really wants to be seen as a pro-reform force, it should engage in these discussions with greater sincerity, sending an undiluted message of solidarity with whatever outcome this process yields. At the same time, it should balance its political aspirations with the broader national interest. That goes for all other parties as well. Any attempt to politicise the reform drive—whether by questioning and obstructing the process or by selectively endorsing reforms that suit their interests—will serve neither the parties nor the country in the long run.
Badiuzzaman Bay is assistant editor at The Daily Star. He can be reached at [email protected].
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.
The High Court has sought relevant documents from the government to determine BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia's "genuine" date of birth.
In response to a writ petition, the court asked the authorities concerned of the government to provide the record regarding her date of birth in 60 days.
The HC also issued a rule asking the respondents to show causes why their inaction to prosecute Khaleda Zia under relevant law for celebrating her birthday on different dates deliberately to malign and undermine the solemnity of National Mourning Day on August 15 should not be declared illegal.
Secretaries to the ministries of home affairs and health and family planning, inspector general of police, commissioner of Dhaka Metropolitan Police, and officer-in-charge of Gulshan Police Station have made respondents to the rule.
The HC bench of Justice M Enayetur Rahim and Justice Sardar Md Rashed Jahangir came up with the order and rule after holding hearing on a writ petition filed by Supreme Court lawyer Mamun Or Rashid, challenging the legality of celebrating birthday by Khaleda Zia on August 15.
The petitioner said that it is a matter of great distress for the nation that Khaleda Zia has mentioned and used her date of birth on August 15, 1946 in the current passport with an ulterior motive -- to malign the National Mourning Day when the Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was brutally killed with his family members in 1975.
Also, Khaleda Zia's date of birth is September 5, 1946 according to her SSC certificate; August 4, 1944 according to her marriage registration certificate; August 5, 1946 according to her machine-readable passport; and May 8, 1946 according to her Covid-19 test report, the petitioner said in the petition.
BNP's Joint Secretary General and former Supreme Court Bar Association Secretary AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon opposed the petition, saying that the writ petitioner has been filed in order to achieve political gains.
Thousands of people including Khaleda Zia were born on August 15, he said, adding it is not the work of the HC to deal with such a matter involving a birthday.
Body:
From what is unfolding before us, it seems we are set to be in a situation that can be described as "the rule of the AL, for the AL and by the AL." Campaigning has started, there are random processions on the main streets, a little boat is making the rounds and blaring cacophonous film songs on Kazi Nazrul Islam Avenue, poster printers are relieved that they will not have to fold the business thanks to the dum…, oh sorry, "independent candidates," 27 registered parties are participating—doesn't matter if nobody has ever heard of most of them—and relatives of aspirants are rushing to the constituencies to liven up the campaign partying. No doubt, in the days to follow, the festivities will be accentuated with mammoth mejbaan (feasts) and huge gatherings. These also coincide with pitha season; nothing could be sweeter.
That the police have earmarked certain polling centres to be troublesome and may beef up security, and that even the armed forces will be deployed, give an added veneer of authenticity to the whole affair. What's an election without a few violent clashes between rival candidates and their minions, even if they both belong to the same side of the game?
The stage may look and even feel like that put up for a real election. Yet, somehow, the smell of something rotting just underneath won't go away.
That the police have earmarked certain polling centres to be troublesome and may beef up security, and that even the armed forces will be deployed, give an added veneer of authenticity to the whole affair. What's an election without a few violent clashes between rival candidates and their minions, even if they both belong to the same side of the game?
By eliminating any dialogue with the only real opposition party, BNP, the situation can only be compared to a fixed game—with many being reluctant to go all the way to the stadium. Already, at least 1,000 BNP leaders and activists have reportedly been jailed since August in an unprecedentedly speedy series of trials. The remaining leaders are on the run with some of their family members being detained by the police after not finding the accused individual. Perhaps the most jarring example of clamping down on the opposition was the arrests of BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir and the party's standing committee member Amir Khasru Mahmud Chowdhury in a case over assaulting a policeman on October 28. Fakhrul has been denied bail three times so far. Before this, BNP's staunch refusal to join the election under the present government, and the ruling party's determination to do just that, ensured that there was little ground for a dialogue that could lead to a solution.
Despite all the wheeling and dealing, the EC's apparent sternness about electoral code and all the meticulous event planning, the brewing resentment of the public cannot be wished away. People are suffering—the long lines at the TCB (Trading Corporation of Bangladesh) trucks and the desperate look of the regular bazaar goer are dead giveaways. Small businesses dependent on imported goods are floundering under the dollar crisis, having failed to open Letters of Credit at the banks. The families of opposition leaders and activists are under tremendous pressure, psychologically and financially, having to fight the multiple cases filed against their loved ones. And let's not forget the forgotten: those who continue to languish in jail under the former Digital Security Act and other draconian laws for the crime of expressing dissent, and also those who have been disappeared without a trace.
There is also the inconvenience of an already severely stressed economy, which will continue to be in crisis mode, under myriad pressures. Due dates of foreign debt payments, a bleeding financial sector riddled by scams, thousands of crores in defaulted loans, private and government banks struggling with liquidity, low remittances, unhappy garment workers—the list is painfully and overwhelmingly long.
Despite all this, we may apparently see respectable turnouts at the polls. AL-nominated and AL independent candidates (there are 382 of the latter, contesting 221 seats) will have enough AL supporters to represent a decent percentage. Even Jatiya Party will attract its own followers, especially if given a clear field. The obscure parties fighting for the "eagle" or "truck" signs will at least get a few of their family members to vote for them. "A participatory, free, and fair election," the EC will gleefully announce.
But while everything on the surface has been fixed and made sparkly, putrid bubbles are brewing under the surface; not likely to be contained at any time. Will the predictable victors be ready to face the blow-up?
Aasha Mehreen Aminis joint editor at 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.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. 
