The Awami League is set to hold a public rally in Rajshahi on January 29. Party leaders and activists have been taking preparations to ensure that it will be a mammoth one. As the national election is just a year away, such public rallies will basically turn into election campaign rallies. So, aspiring candidates will try to get as many bodies as possible on the streets to reflect the range of their strength and support.

In all of this, one piece of news caught my eye. A special train is set to take Awami League leaders and activists to Rajshahi from Natore to attend the rally on January 29. State Minister for Information and Communication Technology, Zunaid Ahmed Palak, told journalists that the special train will not affect the schedule of regular trains. He also said that the AL men would pay for the ride.

But another report stated that AL lawmaker Habibe Millat Munna of Sirajganj has rented a special train of 15 coaches for the Rajshahi rally.

Read more

‘Special train’ for Awami League, ‘transport strike’ for BNP

Can a political party – regardless of whether they are in power or in opposition – use public property to attend a party rally? And is this option available to any citizen, for any political party?

In September last year, the main opposition camp, BNP, announced divisional rallies protesting the killing of BNP men, hike of electricity and fuel prices, and to demand the release of party leader Khaleda Zia. Almost all their rallies were obstructed by the ruling party, directly and indirectly. The same thing happened when the BNP held its rally in Rajshahi. A transport strike was "called" across the entire division on the morning of December 1. Rajshahi city was practically cut off from the rest of the country.

At the time, ruling party leaders and ministers said that transport owners and workers had enforced strikes and that they had nothing to do with them. But we also witnessed the transport strike being withdrawn soon after the BNP rally ended. We also found that mobile internet services were disrupted around the venue on the day. We saw how BNP activists were obstructed and, perhaps more importantly, how the general people suffered as a consequence.

As a journalist, I covered some of the BNP rallies and found the same narrative to be true. I saw how a single-day rally turned into a three-day rally. For the BNP, there were transport strikes so that its supporters and sympathisers could not join. For the Awami League, there were arrangements of special trains so that party faithfuls could join the rally in droves.

Read more

How do bus strikes ahead of BNP rallies affect transport workers?

Our political culture has taken such a turn that we take for granted that the ruling party will get some special treatment when they hold rallies, and the opposition is bound to face obstruction for doing the same. What happened centring on BNP's rallies is actually normal and, it appears, so is what's about to happen on January 29 in Rajshahi (that is, the special train for Awami League's rally).

This new normal is currently the most pressing problem in Bangladeshi politics. We used to hear the phrase "level playing field," but when the caretaker government system was abolished following a court order, opposition parties and many civil society members said there wouldn't be a level playing field anymore. And a free and fair election would not be possible if a level playing field is not ensured. But ever since the 2014 election, the term "level playing field" appears to have evaporated from our political vocabulary, speeches, discussions, and even from rhetoric. That is the new normal.

As distrust, fuelled by intolerance, widens among the two major political camps, and the path towards mutual understanding is basically shunned, this new normal will push the whole nation into an abyss of political uncertainty that is far from normal.

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

We may all breathe a sigh of relief that the brouhaha over the EVMs is finally over, with the Election Commission deciding to forego the use of the electronic machines in the upcoming parliamentary election citing a lack of funds. Since it was first introduced in 2018, there have been widespread fear about its fool-proofness to electoral tampering; in particular, concerns were raised about the audit cards via which election results are collected, which are vulnerable to manipulation in the absence of a voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT). Despite strong reservations from many political parties, including the BNP, and civil society actors, the EC, till now, seemed hell-bent on going ahead with its decision to use EVMs, finalising a massive Tk 8,711 crore project for EVM procurement and management last year.

Read more

Why should we trust EVMs?

We are glad that the EC has finally seen reason, if only in consideration of the enormous expenses that the project would entail. Back when the proposal was first made, we had warned the EC against such an expensive undertaking in the midst of the worst economic and cost-of-living crisis in over a decade, particularly given that Bangladesh was buying the EVMs at inflated costs. Now that the EC has retracted its position, we wonder what will happen to the 150,000 EVMs already bought in phases since 2018, at 11 times the price of the machines in India. EVMs worth Tk 642 crore have already become unusable for a lack of proper storage facility and maintenance, according to EC documents. We urge the EC to make sure that our remaining stock – paid with taxpayers' money – are stored properly so that they may be used in the future, if and when it is decided, through political consensus, to switch to EVMs. 

Read more

‘Decision to use EVMs defies all logic’

While the decision to scrap the EVMs is a step in the right direction, the EC must not lose sight of the fact that there are many other pressing issues that it must address before the public, and other political parties can be confident that the upcoming elections will be free, fair and participatory. Foremost among them is ensuring full independence of the EC, and guaranteeing the ever-illusive "level-playing field" for all political parties. Unfortunately, the performance of the EC in the by-elections, except for one notable exception, has not inspired confidence in its ability to rise above and rein in party politics. As it tries to engage with other political parties and to ensure them of its neutrality, the commission needs to remember that it is only through its commitment to the electoral process – rather than the party in power – that it can inspire faith about its ability to guide the nation to a democratic future. 

Read more

EC in second year must do a better job

The EC must also prove its ability to ensure compliance of the administration and law enforcement in playing their part in defending the democratic process. It must not be seen as reflecting the increasingly intolerant stance of the government towards critics, human rights defenders and the media. 

The BNP, on its end, must forego its propensity to reject any and all proposal and initiatives of the EC, without due consideration or discussion. Such wholesale rejection will not produce constructive results, and risks jeopardising not just future prospects for the party, but the country at large.

BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir expressed deep shock at the death of Jatiya Party Chairman and former president HM Ershad.

In a condolence message, Fakhrul prayed for the salvation of Ershad's soul and conveyed sympathy to his bereaved family members and well-wishers.

Ershad breathed his last at Combined Military Hospital (CMH ) at 7:45am, ISPR Assistant Director Rashedul Alam Khan told The Daily Star.

Read more

Ershad's first namaz-e-janaza held

Ershad, also the leader of the opposition in the Parliament and a five-time MP, had long been suffering from various ailments including infection in his lungs and kidneys and was admitted to CMH on June 26 and was kept at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). His condition later deteriorated and was kept on oxygen support on June 30.

When the top leadership of the Awami League and BNP, the two major political parties in Bangladesh, ruled out any possibility of talks ahead of the next parliamentary election, the Election Commission appeared in the scene by inviting the BNP to a dialogue.

Suspicious about the sudden invitation, the BNP rejected it outright, calling it "meaningless." Although the EC roadmap, announced late last year, did not say anything about talks with the political parties, it did mention that gaining their trust was a major challenge. But it did not spell out how that trust would be earned.

The EC invitation to BNP came at a time when Awami League and BNP leaders were both meeting with diplomats about the next election. It was widely reported that Western diplomats emphasised holding a free and fair election. To add to the context, the US Department of State has published its annual flagship human rights report where it was mentioned for the first time that the 2018 election was neither free nor fair. Charles Whiteley, the European Union ambassador to Bangladesh, said the EU would not send observers to the next election if it is not participatory. Now, if the international observers don't come, the election's credibility as well as the EC's role will remain under question.

Read more

In which direction is Bangladesh heading?

It could be said that the election authorities only acted responsibly when they invited the main opposition, seeing as the issue of a participatory election is under discussion right now. On the surface, at least, the EC has demonstrated their willingness to hold an inclusive, free and fair election. But one ought to ask what the EC is looking to achieve through these talks. Other than the commission gaining some mileage by showing their attempts, and the political parties playing to the gallery, there is not much that these talks would gain. In that respect, talks with the EC would be rather infructuous.

The invitation letter to the BNP also clarifies some things. While the Election Commission is fully aware of BNP's position regarding an election-time government, there is no comment related to that in the letter. To make any progress with the election, the stumbling blocks must be dealt with, and the commission must have a specific agenda for the talks – for instance, whether to use electronic voting machines (EVMs) or not. The invitation letter does not carry any such details. Then why hold these talks?

The Election Commission may claim that their goal is to ensure an inclusive 12th parliamentary election. But simply saying that is not enough, given the previous EC's complete failure to hold a credible election in 2018, and then even admitting that publicly.

The BNP should have taken time to deliberate over their decision before rejecting the EC invitation. Now they have to explain why they don't want to join the talks. Shunning the possibility of dialogues is not a good option for any political party. The only meaningful explanation could be that holding talks with the EC would, in fact, give it the legitimacy that the BNP has refused from the beginning. But it is unlikely that the main opposition camp has given the matter any such thought.

The incumbent EC could claim that they are different from their predecessors. But then, one could ask what this commission has done to earn the trust of all political parties. The commission's activities so far don't portray them in a favourable light, nor do they indicate sincere intentions. The BNP, which boycotted EC dialogues in June and July last year, has not shown any confidence in the electoral authority since its formation – and even before its formation, since the party did not join the talks initiated by the president and did not propose any name to the search committee of this EC. The party has repeatedly said that the EC would not be able to hold a free, fair and participatory general election.

The lack of trust for the Election Commission deepened when it went ahead with the decision to use EVMs in the upcoming general election, ignoring the objection of many political parties, including the BNP. That decision, while embracing modernity and change, was aligned with the desire of the ruling party.

Undoubtedly, rejecting the dialogue would be a setback for the BNP as it would garner criticism from the ruling party. The EC would be able to say that they tried, but could not bring BNP to the table. BNP leaders would have to remain busy for a few days parrying all the criticism. The party may even face questions from the international community.

Read more

Political dialogues: The long road to nowhere

The BNP should have taken time to deliberate over their decision before rejecting the EC invitation. Now they have to explain why they don't want to join the talks. Shunning the possibility of dialogues is not a good option for any political party. The only meaningful explanation could be that holding talks with the EC would, in fact, give it the legitimacy that the BNP has refused from the beginning. But it is unlikely that the main opposition camp has given the matter any such thought.

Having said all that, the political parties can take advantage of the situation as it suits their strategy, but not the Election Commission, which is a constitutional body and assigned to hold a free, fair and participatory election. Lip service or mere show of effort may not be enough.

Listening to the trials and tribulations of this political reporter, and learning that the EC had invited the opposition to the table, a relative recounted an anecdote about the stingy hosts of a certain part of the country, where guests would often arrive on boats. The story goes like this: in this certain region, the hosts keep mum as the guests get ready to leave and get on their boat to return home, and just when the hosts push off the boat, they say, "I wish you had stayed a few more days with us." But by then the boat is already sailing, and the guests have nothing but to say, "Next time!"

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