Three recent elections, federal in Canada, state level in Bihar and national in Myanmar, have once again showed us the might of the "Peoples' Will" and what it can achieve. Each of these elections had some special significance with the one in Bihar and the last one in Myanmar having unparalleled historic significance. These elections reminded us that we had some internationally praised and historically significant elections of our own and made us wonder when we would have similar elections in Bangladesh again?

Given Canada's track record and institutional strength, smooth elections are not unusual. Defeat of an incumbent, in power for ten years, was even less so. What, however, made it so interesting is the comeback of the Liberal party with such a force. In a House of 338 seats, Justin Trudeau led his party to a 184 seat victory. But that is not the whole story. In the previous election in 2011, his party had got only 34 seats which jumped to 184 this time. The 150 seat gain was the biggest ever for a single party in Canada's history and it is for the first time that a party positioned third became the majority party.

The Bihar elections, much closer to home, was significantly different in nature and content. It was a frontal fight on all counts. Persons, parties and issues were all stark and bitter. As the elections neared, the campaign got bitter and so did the personal attacks--nothing to match ours of course, election or no election. The Grand Alliance (Mahagathbandhan) formed by two former bitter enemies, Nitish Kumar and Lalu Prasad Yadav and the Congress and many other smaller parties created a tide that even the charismatic and highly effective campaigner Narendra Modi could not stem. The Times of India calls it the catching up of the Law of Diminishing Return for the Prime Minister.

For us in Bangladesh, the election took greater significance than usual because of the communal colour that Indian politics was taking in the last few months and which inevitably got reflected in this election. The "beef eating" controversy and some sporadic killing of Muslims on suspicion of eating it suddenly made Indian politics look almost medieval. The desperate attempt by BJP to use the "cow" issue to rally the votes in Bihar definitely made the election a far more religion based than it would otherwise have been.

We cannot but be gratified at the defeat of the communal politics in Bihar even if for the time being. In that sense, Bihar election can turn out to be of historic significance as a clear signal by the Indian voters that they reject the divisive nature of the present BJP politics.

Of all the three, the Myanmar election is the most significant. The might of "Peoples' Will" glowed in all its majesty inspiring democracy loving people all over the world. The army had been in power there for more than sixty years, making Myanmar one of the most isolated, backward and poor countries in the world, all the while siphoning off the country's wealth for personal aggrandisement of the generals and their relatives and cronies.

It is a sign of the inner urge for freedom of people in general that, with all the threats, intimidation, and power play by the army, voters voted for democracy and totally rejected the army's involvement in running the country.

The army held the election under its own rule, set plan and a tailor made constitution that reserved 25% of the nominated seats for itself no matter how the voting went. The army backed USDP has received only 7 % of the votes so far counted.

The good news is President Thein Sein has consistently promised the results will be honoured and his spokesman Ye Htut has already offered his congratulations to NLD's (National League for Democracy) leader Suu Kyi.

These three elections started a stream of memories in this writer. The first one is of the election of 1970. Its similarity with the one in Myanmar is quite striking. It was held during the last days of Pakistani Army's rule, led my General Yahya Khan. Like in Myanmar, the Pakistan army also had a tailor made law, called the Legal Framework Order, which basically governed the election process completely supervised by them. Unlike in Myanmar, the Pakistan Army did not keep any reserved seats for themselves in the new dispensation that was about to be ushered in. The 'good sense' of the army was not due to their love for people's rule or that they wanted to leave the running of the country totally to the people's representatives but to a realistic assessment of the public mood which would not have accepted any such move in either wing of the country, especially by the Bengalis of the eastern wing.

Like Myanmar, we were led by our own charismatic leader and again like Myanmar the majesty of "Public Will" broke through all the barriers set up by the army.  As a young voter full of enthusiasm to break out of the army's control over our political life I, along with millions of others, much like the youth and students of Myanmar, worked to ensure that our wishes held sway over that of the army. I can almost relive the happiness of those moments 45 years ago as no doubt the youth of Myanmar are experiencing at this very moment.

Fast-forwarding to the nineties, when once again we tore political power away from the army's grip and gave it to the people's representatives, first by peaceful protests and then by an election in 1991. This election, steered through by an Interim Government led by Justice Shahabuddin, marked a watershed in our history, bringing representative rule back on track.

Democracy thus restored, we felt certain that our politicians, much the wiser from the brutal killing of Bangabandhu and his family, the subsequent killings of four national leaders, killings of army's brightest generals and officers and the various attempts to derail our democracy, will set us on a steady course of freedom and development.

We began well by a historic cooperation between the Treasury Bench, formed by BNP, and the Opposition, formed by AL, working together to amend the constitution and bringing back parliamentary form of government in place of the presidential one. There was a second instance of collaboration in 1996, this time forced upon BNP through mass agitation that instituted the caretaker form of government to oversee elections as a permanent system by amending the constitution. The election of 1996 saw a peaceful changeover of power with AL forming the government after 21 years.

Oscillation of power between our two major parties--AL and BNP--however flawed and acrimonious, took us forward on a somewhat bumpy democratic path till 2004. On August 21st of that year, an attempt was made to assassinate Sheikh Hasina, then opposition leader and now Prime Minister, causing the death of 24 of AL leaders and workers.

This transformed Sheikh Hasina's view of Khaleda Zia and of the party she led. She no longer saw Khaleda simply as a political antagonist nor the BNP as a rival party but the former as someone during whose premiership a highly orchestrated attempt was made to kill her and the ruling party of that time made no serious attempt to get the killers.

This has changed our politics forever and has thrown the prospect of institutionalization of democracy into serious jeopardy. Most importantly this made the cost of losing an election extremely high, including the prospect of getting killed, as the AL experience shows. With such a price for losing election, both parties are now willing to do anything and everything to win, including manipulating the election itself, as we saw in 2014, in which 153 MPs, a majority in a House of 300, were elected without a single vote being cast.

Thus, as I watched the aforementioned elections I couldn't help but wonder, regrettably with a sense of envy, when would we ever have such elections here again, which will be free, fair and festive, and more importantly, losing which will not lead to fearful consequences?