We welcome the formation of the new Election Commission headed by former health and energy secretary AMM Nasir Uddin. With this, the "train to the election"—as termed by Chief Adviser Prof Muhammad Yunus—has indeed started rolling. While this is just the first step in what promises to be a lengthy journey, it is a momentous one for a nation emerging from the long shadow of fascism. The announcement about the five-member commission, which will be sworn in on Sunday, seemed imminent following the chief adviser's address marking 100 days of the interim government. In the coming days, this moment will serve as a reference point for what follows, and we hope it will be for all the right reasons.

Read more

A lot remains to be done by the government

One doesn't need reminding of the immense expectations and challenges facing the new commission. The stakes are high, especially after more than 15 years of autocratic rule by the Awami League regime that systematically disenfranchised citizens, but also because of the enormous sacrifices that went into ousting it. During the July-August uprising, around 1,500 people lost their lives, while nearly 20,000 were injured, many critically. Their demand for democratic rights free from discrimination—underpinned by a fair and credible election—is a mandate that the commission must fulfil. There is optimism that it will not repeat the mistakes of its predecessors, but it must remain vigilant at all times given today's polarised sociopolitical climate.

Read more

The case for internal reforms within political parties

An election alone will not solve all our problems, however. This is why the chief adviser's emphasis on implementing some essential reforms prior to the election, leaving the rest to a democratically elected government, resonates so strongly. For now, we must keep our eyes on the process—the journey rather than the destination—and that, for the Election Commission, begins with laying down the tracks for necessary electoral reforms. BNP and other parties are calling for an election roadmap which will be issued once decisions on the electoral reforms are made. A commission is currently working on that, and will likely submit its reports between December and January. There is a democratic process in place to finalise the agenda, which we hope will lead to an electoral framework that is not only fair but also perceived as such by all political parties and the public alike.

Read more

Can we exorcise Sisyphus from our political culture?

We look to the Election Commission to ensure that the upcoming election, whenever it is held, genuinely reflects the will of the people. Anything less would—to echo the chief election commissioner—betray the sacrifices of all those who gave their lives in the mass uprising. The authorities must not fail them.

In an unprecedented move, the Election Commission (EC) has sent a letter to the home ministry, asking that political parties be stopped from holding rallies and other public events that may obstruct the election process and discourage people from casting their votes. The commission has suggested that the measures be in place from December 18, 2023 to January 7, 2024. We are at a loss to understand on what grounds the EC can make such a demand of the government.

Read more

Dead men tell no tales—but they do in police cases

To begin, the right to assemble and participate in public meetings is a fundamental human right, enshrined in the constitution. As long as demonstrations are peaceful and law-abiding, what justification can there be for a blanket ban on all political gatherings in a country that still calls itself a democracy? If the EC is concerned with unruly or unlawful behaviour, the law enforcement authorities are there to intervene and bring things under control. In fact, over the past few months, we have seen them take increasingly high-handed measures during gatherings and demonstrations against BNP and like-minded parties. At a time when the EC should be ensuring that the government allows all political parties to carry out their activities peacefully and without fear of arrests or unwarranted obstructions, we are disappointed to see them take a diametrically opposite stance.

Read more

Are we running in circles?

If the EC is really concerned about voter turnout, then it ought to ask itself whether the election that it is so ceremoniously organising, spending Tk 1,600 crore of public funds, will actually inspire confidence in voters to exercise their voting rights in the absence of the biggest opposition party, its allies, and left-leaning political parties. Having failed to ensure a level playing field since its term began, or bring together the major parities in a meaningful dialogue, the EC now wants to ban all political demonstrations altogether in a move that is tantamount to cutting the head off to get rid of a headache.

Read more

Election Commission's burden of a looming non-inclusive election

We should not have to remind the EC that an election is about the people's right to choose their own representatives. If citizens are unhappy with the electoral process and feel that their right to vote is being violated, then surely, citizens also have the right to express this dissatisfaction. If the EC is truly concerned about voter turnout, then it's time for it to do some serious soul-searching. Instead of addressing the underlying issues that are likely to deter voters from participating in the upcoming election, banning political gatherings altogether will only raise further questions about the EC's independence from the government and erode people's confidence in it.

No one remembers an election for its being held on time. A massive undertaking like election must go according to plan, following rules and a fixed timetable, but it is just so that a free, fair and credible election can be held. Confusing the means with the end is a cardinal error in strategy—it is also a recipe for disaster, as we have seen in 2014 and 2018. Yet, this is what Awami League again seems to be doing. It has reportedly responded to US Assistant Secretary Donald Lu's call for dialogue to resolve the political deadlock, saying "there is not enough time for holding any meaningful dialogue"—alluding to the recently-unveiled schedule that set a January 7 date for the next election.

Read more

Both parties must exhibit conscience and actively support a fair election

On Thursday, a day after the polls schedule was unveiled, the party's general secretary also spoke in these very terms while dismissing the possibility of talks with BNP. He said: "What can we do if they [BNP] do not get on the train? The electoral train waits for no one. When the train leaves, it does not and will not stop [for anyone]." In its letter to Donald Lu, the party also claimed that it had "kept the door open" for unconditional dialogue but it didn't work because of BNP's unwavering position on the resignation of the government as a prerequisite for any talk or the holding of any election.

Read more

Polls schedule is not a cut-off point for dialogue

This is only half the truth, however. Firstly, the assumption that the polling date announcement somehow marks a cut-off point for attempts to reach political consensus through dialogue is naïve as best, and dangerous at worst. Is sticking to a timeline more crucial than addressing the fundamental concerns of a fair and inclusive democratic process? Or is it just an excuse for avoiding genuine engagement on the critical issues that remain unresolved? Secondly, how sincere has Awami League really been in "keeping the door open"? Has it reached out to BNP and other parties to work out a plan? Has it sent any official invitation? If anything, it has sent mixed signals all along, sometimes acknowledging the importance of dialogue as a concept and sometimes ruling out the possibility of talks with "arsonists" and "murderers". Its arguments—now resting on polls schedule—have clearly evolved with time, which is frustrating.

Read more

Are we running in circles?

Awami League's commitment to a free and fair election necessitates actions aligned with these principles. And that, right now, includes making greater efforts to engage with the opposition.

Civil Aviation Minister Rashed Khan Menon yesterday rightly described the death of militant suspects in so-called "crossfire" and "gun battle" as weakness and failure of the law-enforcement agencies.

Speaking in a discussion on the proposed budget in parliament, he also echoed many others' views that such extrajudicial killings are not a solution to rising militancy.

His remarks have merit as the extrajudicial killings by the law enforcers in last 12 years could not ensure sustainable improvement in law and order. People do not feel safer more than they were 12 years ago.

Extrajudicial killings of some criminals or militant suspects may bring a temporary respite. But the vacuum created after their deaths is filled up with emergence of new criminals and militants.

Exercise of unlawful means by the law enforcers also damages their morale and destroys their efficacy and professionalism. They prefer a shortcut solution to any problems -- like killings -- instead of unearthing through investigation the reasons behind any crime or law and order slide.

It also creates a very dangerous situation when the law enforcers themselves prefer not to abide by the law. Therefore, unlawful killings are proved as an ineffective means to ensure people's safety. We are exactly facing such a situation in Bangladesh.

Extrajudicial killings by the law enforcers had initially been considered as a necessary and short-term expedient during the past BNP-led government to improve law and order in 2004.

This was revealed by the then second-in-command of Rapid Action Battalion (Rab) during a June 2005 conversation with some US embassy officials in Dhaka, according to a US diplomatic dispatch from Dhaka.

They had met Chowdhury Fazlul Bari, additional director general of Rab, to get some insights into the situation following domestic and international outcry against the unlawful killings by the law-enforcement agencies including Rab since 2004.

The then US ambassador in Dhaka Patricia A Butenis sent the cable to Washington in April 2006, which was leaked and posted on whistleblower website WikiLeaks in 2011.

Brigadier General Bari was an influential figure during the 2007-08 tenure of military-backed caretaker regime.

What Bari described a "short-term expedient" in 2005 seems to have become a permanent practice.

On average, 150 people were killed in extrajudicial means every year in last 12 years in the name of measures to improve law and order.

But the killings of around 1,800 people that way in last 12 years could not ensure a sustainable improvement. The latest spate of secret killings has rather put people in a state of panic.

And in such a situation, the unlawful action of extrajudicial killings has been taking place in the country. As many as 14 people have so far been killed in "gunfight" this month. Of them, seven were militant suspects.

The long-term negative impact of extrajudicial killings on the country's legal system and governance is immense.

According to the existing legal system, it is the mandate of the judiciary to determine who is a criminal and who is not and punish the criminals according to the offence they have committed.

But in case of every extrajudicial killing, the country's legal system has been made redundant. The state brings down itself to the level of alleged criminals and militant suspects to punish them unlawfully, exposing a fragile state of governance.

This is acceptable nowhere in the world.