In June this year, many had described the Cumilla City Corporation elections as a "trial run" for the Election Commission's competence in organising polls, especially in terms of using electronic voting machines (EVMs). The results, unfortunately, left much to be desired. Not only did the EC fail to enforce electoral law when a local MP defied its code of conduct, but there was a great deal of controversy around the use of EVMs as well, leading to pandemonium during the declaration of results. The chaos surrounded the fact that there was no mechanism to audit or verify the results, or to question the influence of election officials operating the machines, regardless of how dubious said results might seem.

On what scientific basis did the EC decide on using EVMs? And how does it answer the questions being raised about its independence?

Civil society organisations are continuing to raise such concerns to this day. According to SHUJAN: Citizens for Good Governance, there is a huge lack of transparency surrounding EVMs, especially the audit cards via which election results are collected, and which can be tampered with in the absence of a voter-verifiable paper audit trail. There are also confusions over whether EVM software can be manipulated. Beyond that, there are worries that the provision for EVM overwrite by election officials – where the presiding officer is allowed to use the ballot when there are issues with the EVM registering fingerprints – could also be used to manipulate election results.

Read more

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

These concerns have been repeated by opposition political parties as well. However, we have not seen the EC take any concrete steps to set their minds at ease. In fact, the EC has declared that EVMs will be used in around 150 constituencies in the next general election. This will require the use of around 5 lakh audit cards, meaning it will be impossible to find the time and resources to run forensic analysis on such a huge number of cards to ensure they are not tampered with. On what scientific basis did the EC decide on using EVMs? And how does it answer the questions being raised about its independence?

Read more

EC’s big nothing: From a crowning moment to a humbling experience

The EC has claimed it will do everything to ensure free and fair elections. To this end, it has even held dialogues with opposition parties, but the decision regarding EVMs makes clear that their demands were taken lightly. Over the past week, we have also witnessed BNP rallies in multiple districts being systematically attacked by ruling party men, sometimes with the help of police. Does the EC still believe this is a conducive environment for free elections? And if not, what does it intend to do about it?

It is up to the EC to ensure that the people are able to cast their votes. Against the backdrop of increasing election violence and political repression, choosing a system of voting that has been roundly described by experts as dampening voter turnout is yet another wrong decision from an increasingly long list curated by the EC.

It is heartening to see that the media has been preparing statements based on the information in affidavits submitted by the candidates who are running for parliament. This requirement of submitting affidavits came from a ruling by the high court bench led by Justice Abdul Matin in 2005. The judgement required the candidates running for parliament to submit eight kinds of information with their nomination papers. These include their educational qualifications, criminal records, and assets, income and liabilities of both themselves and their dependents.

The court also directed the Election Commission to disseminate this information so that the people could use it to make informed decisions in casting their votes. The EC, however, failed to disseminate that information. We, on behalf of SHUJAN, have been disseminating this information through the media by preparing comparative statements for each constituency. We also thwarted the sinister efforts by an imposter named Abu Safa who, using false information, tried to overturn the high court judgement.

This idea of disclosure of information about the candidates in the form of affidavits has a history. In 2002, in Union of India vs Association for Democratic Reforms [2002 (3) SCC], the Indian supreme court gave a seminal judgement in which it stated that the right to know about public officials is derived from the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression.

Read more

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

In a second case, People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) vs Union of India [2003 (4) SCC], the Supreme Court of India further emphasised the importance of disclosure of antecedents. Using this information, the court opined, the voters could decide whether they would vote for A or B. The court further said that if you don't want to turn democracy into a farce, you have to give the voters this right to have information about the background of the candidates. Bangladesh's judgement of 2005 followed these seminal judgments of the Indian supreme court.

There have been numerous efforts in our country to thwart this judgement. For example, in 2013 there were four city corporation elections: Barisal, Khulna, Rajshahi, and Sylhet. In the previous election, held in 2007, the Awami League mayoral candidates won and the BNP candidates lost. The same candidates ran again in 2013. We compared the affidavits submitted by the same candidates in both elections to see what happened to their income and wealth. What we found was that the income and wealth of the incumbent mayors, who were elected in 2007, skyrocketed. And the wealth and income of those who didn't win in 2007 either remained the same or declined. Thus, it became clear that getting elected was like getting an Aladdin's lamp in one's hands. In other words, anyone occupying an elected office is able to mint money and get rich. We held a press conference to disseminate our findings. In response, Awami League sent a letter to the EC saying that we had defamed them using concocted information. This allegation was totally false as we used the information disclosed by candidates in their affidavits sworn before a magistrate. It should be noted that including false information in an affidavit, sworn before a magistrate, is a criminal offence under section 181 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Yet, we were accused of using misinformation with the intention of defaming the candidates.

The biggest attack came from Sayed Ashraful Islam, the general secretary of Awami League. In 2014, according to a Prothom Alo report, he said that the affidavits have become the tools of character assassination of politicians. Clearly, these were efforts to do away with the requirement of disclosing antecedents by candidates in the form of affidavits. But they forgot one extremely important detail. The demand for disclosures came from the Awami League itself. On July 15, 2005, Sheikh Hasina, the then leader of the opposition, said in a press conference that the candidates must submit her/his own and their dependants' wealth information with their nomination papers. Additionally, they would have to declare if they have any personal stake in any economic activities of the government. She also demanded that those who lied or provided misinformation in their affidavit face strict legal consequences. However, this was not the only instance when Awami League reiterated the importance of disclosure of antecedents of powerful individuals including MPs.

Read more

Politicians’ wealth surge and why nations fail

Before the 2008 parliamentary election, Awami League published its famous election manifesto, Dinbodoler Sanad (Charter for Change), in which it promised to regularly disclose the wealth statements of all powerful people in the government. But unfortunately, the ruling party and the government didn't keep their commitment.

The EC has also not been verifying the information submitted by the candidates. There are widespread allegations of concealing or providing concocted information in the affidavits. A recent newspaper report indicates that at least nine of the ministers didn't declare their dependents' wealth in their affidavits. Notwithstanding the hiding of information, the skyrocketing of income and wealth shown in the affidavits of candidates who are running for the upcoming election reflect an obscene display of riches when many citizens are struggling to make ends meet.

One prime example of a candidate hiding information is Barrister Shahjahan Omar, who went to jail as a senior leader of BNP, then got bail to join Awami League and run for the upcoming election with the boat symbol. He appears to have hidden information about his wealth. More seriously, he did not disclose information about the cases under which he was arrested and bailed. For such non-disclosure, his nomination paper should be declared invalid under section 12(3)(b) of The Representation of the People Order, 1972. However, both the returning officer and the EC cleared Barrister Omar's nomination, allowing him to contest in the election to be held on January 7. Here didn't both the returning officer and the EC violate the law in validating Barrister Omar's nomination paper?

Read more

The facade of a competitive election

In the last few decades, a lot of people have become very rich in our country, mostly through illegal means. They are now trying to "buy" political power by becoming MPs using their ill-gotten money. As a result, over two-thirds of our MPs are now businessmen who have been trying to further their interests using government power. Many of them also hide information in their affidavits. Entry of many of these self-interested individuals to our electoral arena could be blocked if the EC would take the requirement of the submission of affidavits seriously and thoroughly scrutinise them. Unfortunately, despite our repeated efforts, we have not been able to convince the EC to scrutinise the affidavits and disqualify those who hide or submit false information in their affidavits. If the commission lacks capacity to scrutinise the affidavits, they can use the help of the Anti-Corruption Commission and the National Bureau of Revenue for this purpose.

The format for the affidavit developed before the 2008 elections has some serious limitations. We updated the format and shared it with the EC, but received no positive response from the commission. We hope the EC will take it seriously and revise the format and apply it vigorously. We urge it to do its part to clean up our electoral arena by turning the halafnama into amalnama for candidates running for office.

Dr Badiul Alam Majumdar is secretary of SHUJAN: Citizens for Good Governance.

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.

We are deeply saddened by the passing of former Election Commissioner Mahbub Talukdar (80). With his death, we have lost one of the most rebellious voices in the history of electoral politics in Bangladesh. A freedom fighter who taught Bangla at Chattogram University before the war, Talukdar joined civil service in 1971, and since then, served in various capacities till his retirement. Perhaps his most remarkable time as a bureaucrat was when he was at the Election Commission (2017-2022), where he emerged as a lone crusader against the ills of our electoral system. He never hesitated to speak up or criticise the commission's own decisions that he believed went against the interests of citizens.

Read more

The voice for inclusive polls falls silent

Mahbub Talukdar will thus be remembered as a fierce advocate for fair and inclusive elections, the importance of ensuring a level playing field for all parties and candidates, and of course, people's right to vote. As a commissioner, he set inspiring examples of righteousness and boldness, sometimes by walking out of EC meetings or issuing notes of dissent, all aimed at making the country's electoral system acceptable to the people. He believed it was the EC's sacred responsibility to organise free and fair elections, saying: "I will fight for fair elections till the end of my tenure." This he did, as faithfully and honestly as possible. One particular aspect of his fight was his position against the use of EVMs without the consent of all parties – something that the present commission can learn from.

He believed it was the EC's sacred responsibility to organise free and fair elections, saying: "I will fight for fair elections till the end of my tenure."

We remember how, in a bid to make city corporation polls fair, he protested against MPs' engagement in electioneering during such polls. He untiringly protested against voter suppression and other electoral irregularities, including ballot-stuffing the night before the controversial 2018 national election, which he said "gave us nothing but the shame of failure." At the same time, he spoke for reforms in the overall electoral system to avoid such interventions. His integrity, honesty and patriotism were unparalleled.

Mahbub Talukdar was also a multi-talented personality. A man with a golden pen, he was a well-known poet, a short story writer and a novelist. He had 44 books to his credit, mainly on poetry and fiction. He received the prestigious Bangla Academy Literary Award for his contribution to children's literature. A family man, he believed in the traditional culture of the land.

But it is his legacy as a revolutionary election commissioner that we cherish the most today. Will we have another one like him, who will defend the interests of citizens with such courage?

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

Awami League General Secretary Obaidul Quader today held talks with Krishak Sramik Janata League President Abdul Kader Siddique and discussed different issues including the country’s contemporary political affairs.

Later, Nazmul Huda, former minister of BNP-Jamaat-led government, met Quader, also the road transport and bridges minister, and held discussion on the same issues, sources said.

“Kader Siddique came to our office around 3:30pm and talked to Obaidul Quader for around half an hour,” Abu Naser, senior information officer of the Ministry of Road Transport and Bridges, told The Daily Star this evening.

In 1999, Kader Siddiqui was expelled from Awami League and after the expulsion, he resigned from parliament and formed his own party Krishak Sramik Janata League.

Later, former BNP leader Nazmul Huda, also the chief of Bangladesh National Alliance (BNA), met Quader at his ministry office around 4:00pm and stayed there for around half an hour, Naser said.

However, the information officer could not say anything about the matter of discussions.

Quader is now passing very busy days in trying to expand the ruling Awami League-led 14-party alliance ahead of the upcoming general elections late this year or early next year.

According to sources, talks among the country’s top politicians were held to expand the ruling Awami League-led 14-party alliance.

“Talks over the matter were being held and more talks will be held,” the sources said without clarifying any further details.

Contacted, Kader Siddique denied making any comment in this regard.

Sources said the BNA is mulling to hold a programme marking the National Mourning Day on August 15, the day when Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman along with most of his family members were brutally assassinated by a disgruntled group of army officers in 1975.

Huda met Quader and requested him to attend the programme as the chief guest, the sources added.

Earlier, the AL general secretary on Tuesday went to the office of the Communist Party of Bangladesh (CPB) in the capital's Old Paltan area and exchanged greetings with the party leaders present there.

During the brief conversation, the CPB general secretary told Quader that they launched a platform of eight left leaning parties to strengthen the alternative political force against bad politics.

On July 22, eight parties -- Communist Party of Bangladesh (CPB), Bangladesher Samajtantrik Dal (BSD), Bangladesher Biplobi Workers Party, Bangladesher Samajtantrik Dal (Marxist), Gana Sanghati Andalon, Bangladesher United Communist League, Ganatantrik Biplobi Party and Bangladesher Samajtantrik Andalon -- launched a new platform under the banner of “Left Democratic Alliance (LDA)”.

The ruling AL and its principal political opposition BNP are now engaged in hatching efforts to include the newly formed platform of the left leaning parties in their respective camps to gain victory in the next general election.

Besides, the alliance leaders said that no election will be free and fair under the current regime, and they launched the new platform in a bid to wage a movement against farcical polls.

They also said it will not be possible to ensure a level-playing field if the current parliament is not dissolved.