Since the newly formed interim government has taken charge, emergence of an impartial democratic governance has become the sine qua non for restoration of public trust in the electoral system. Since August 5, in a significant overhaul of the local administration, the interim government dismissed 876 elected representatives nationwide. To fill these positions, administrators were appointed in 61 districts, 495 upazilas, and 330 municipalities, largely replacing those who had served under the previous Awami League (AL) government. In addition to the removal of seven previously appointed municipal administrators, 323 municipal mayors were also dismissed.

The administration is also being shaken up with at least five mid-ranking police officials, who were arbitrarily dismissed or sent into forced resignation during the tenure of AL, being reinstated. The chief justice, five justices, top police officials, and the central bank governor—all have gone into retirement, yet there has been no change in the bedrock of the country's democratic governance i.e., the Bangladesh Election Commission (EC).

Read more

The alterations we need in our Election Commission

Questions have been raised about the current Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Kazi Habibul Awal and his colleagues, following the fall of Sheikh Hasina's government. Despite his overseeing the 2024 general election, widely criticised for irregularities and bias, the CEC continues to hold his position at a time when the growing national sentiment is that a new, impartial EC is essential to restore confidence in the electoral process.

Over the past 53 years, Bangladesh has struggled to build a strong electoral system. While elections overseen by caretaker governments since the transition to parliamentary democracy in 1991 were generally considered to be free, fair, and participative, those conducted under political administrations of the ruling AL often lacked credibility due to interference by the government. Same thing happened when the then ruling BNP tried to manipulate the infamous Magura by-polls in 1994.

The electoral system took a significant turn in 2011 when the Sheikh Hasina-led AL abolished the constitutional requirement for a caretaker government through the 15th amendment. This decision led to a boycott of the 2014 general election by BNP and other opposition parties which was marred by violence, voter suppression, and allegations of government crackdowns on opposition leaders. More than half of the seats i.e. 153 out of 300 were uncontested and won by the single ruling party candidates. From 2014 to 2024, the country's electoral landscape has been defined by a series of controversial elections with poor participation, political repression, and concerns over the state of democracy.

Read more

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

Similarly, under former CEC KM Nurul Huda, the 2018 election marked the introduction of electronic voting machines (EVMs) which became a source of controversy with a turnout of 80 percent with the AL, in alliance with the Jatiya Party (JP), securing over 90 percent of the parliamentary seats. Observers reported significant irregularities, such as voter intimidation, ballot stuffing, and occupation of polling booths, raising serious doubts about the integrity of the electoral process and the role of the EC. In 2020, 42 prominent citizens called on the then President Abdul Hamid to establish a Supreme Judicial Council to investigate allegations of misconduct, including financial corruption, against the EC led by KM Nurul Huda.

In 2023, the EC's widely publicised dialogue with registered parties occurred with many expecting the EC to first enable the BNP to freely decide on participating. Instead, the EC considered its duty fulfilled by simply delivering an invitation to the BNP's empty, locked office. Additionally, TIB published a report on the 12th National Parliament Election criticising EC for failing to ensure fairness, transparency, and competitiveness.

The 2024 general election was widely seen as a repeat of previous polls, with an exceptionally low turnout of 27 percent, and the AL poised for another victory. These issues highlight ongoing concerns about the EC's ability to conduct credible elections, yet the EC seems mostly oblivious of its role in the flawed electoral processes. According to Articles 118(4) and 126 of the Constitution of Bangladesh, along with Article 4 of the Representation of the People Order, 1972, the EC is an independent constitutional body, accountable only to the constitution and relevant laws. Given this, it is crucial for the CEC and the EC led by him to uphold democratic principles.

Read more

How do we describe the upcoming election?

On August 24, the CEC wrote a column for Samakal expressing concerns about the constitutional requirement for the EC to conduct general elections within 90 days, as mandated by Article 123(3)(b) of the constitution. He warned that failure to do so could be considered a grave offense under Article 7A, potentially punishable by death. However, he also acknowledged the impossibility of holding elections within this timeframe under current circumstances, likening the situation to "the sword of Damocles hanging over one's head." Given the complexity of the situation, looming crises, and the fact that elections overseen by the EC in the past 15 years have eroded public trust, he and his colleagues should have resigned immediately without waiting for either a call from the president or any other corner who they would have difficulty ignoring.

The interim government needs to rebuild electoral institutions starting with an independent election commission free from political influence. This is an opportunity to restore citizens' trust in elections by creating a sustainable, transparent electoral process that puts power back in the hands of the people. Hence, it is difficult to understand why the current CEC and his colleagues are not submitting resignations as opposed to being asked to do so. Do they really believe that any further election will be held under their stewardship? Or are the salary, benefits, perks and privileges they enjoy too good to be not enjoyed until shown the door?

Prof Syed Munir Khasru is chairman of The Institute for Policy, Advocacy, and Governance (IPAG), an international think tank. He can be reached via www.syedmunirkhasru.org.

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.

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.

Read more

Elections without choice: A leaf out of autocrats’ playbook

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.

Read more

Crackdown, groupthink, and the dialogue that didn’t happen

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 Amin is 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.

Advocate Sultana Kamal, a human rights activist and the founder president of Manabadhikar Shongskriti Foundation, speaks with Eresh Omar Jamal of The Daily Star about Bangladesh's 12th parliamentary election and its ramifications for the country's political and governance landscapes.

With BNP boycotting the January 7 election, and some of the parties who participated in it bargaining with Awami League for seats beforehand, how would you describe the latest election?

I have been giving my comments on the election which was held on January 7 for months. Now that it has already happened, to me, the event of January 7 cannot be called an "election" by any definition, let alone "a participatory election." We all know the arrangements for distribution of seats between the contesting parties were settled amicably beforehand. The election was held in the name of fulfilling a constitutional obligation, which in reality turned out to be a ritual participated by friendly contestants.

By boycotting the election, didn't BNP give AL a free ride? One could argue that the ruling party created a repressive environment for the opposition prior to the election, but by terming its movement as a movement to "oust the government," what sort of a reaction did BNP expect?

Yes, BNP did.

As I kept saying since the 2014 election, BNP made a big (fatal for them) mistake by not participating in the election. True, they did take part in the 2018 election. But by then, they had already lost their position as a political party strong enough to influence the national political psyche. Insisting on terming their movement as a movement to "oust the government," without posing a viable alternative to the nation, was nothing but a blunder on their part. BNP must have expected considerable support from the general people in the context of Awami League's extremely repressive rule, lack of good governance, and democratic deficit. But its failure to provide a convincing picture of a better future did not yield the expected result for BNP.

Given the election results, who do you expect will be the parliamentary opposition? Will that also be decided by AL? And what effect will all this have on the future of Bangladesh's politics?

It is obvious that there will be no effective parliamentary opposition for at least the next five years as, without a few exceptions, all in the parliament are Awami League's people. It's an open secret that non-Awami League contestants were not only allowed to participate in the election at the wish of the AL leader, their winning a seat, too, was dependent on the same factor. An opposition perhaps will be declared officially as a matter of rule. But there is no reason to believe that it will be without AL's knowledge. I am afraid I don't feel very optimistic about Bangladesh's future under the given condition. However, I will definitely be happy if I am proved wrong.

How would you rate the performance of the Awami League government over the last five years? And do you expect any changes this term?

The Awami League government over the last five years concentrated on heavy, visible infrastructural development, in which they showed considerable success. It was during this period that Bangladesh qualified to graduate from being a least-developed country to a developing one. It has also made some progress in attaining a few of the SDG goals in the fields of women's empowerment, enrolment of female students, extending community health services, etc. Bangladesh's GDP grew impressively. The number of ultra-rich in society increased at unprecedented speed. But at the same time, according to eminent economists, the country's economy plunged into uncertainties. This, compounded with a repressive, exploitative, and unethical political atmosphere, created insecurity for people in social, public, and personal spheres. Though Awami League consistently claimed to have run the country according to the spirit of our Liberation War and the ideals of Bangabandhu, ironically, strengthening of democracy, rule of law, zero tolerance for corruption, and respect for human rights of all, and efforts to create a common humane social culture, seem to have disappeared from their agenda.

As said by many, over the past few years, Bangladesh has been divided into two different "societies." One for the rich and the advantaged, the other for the disenfranchised and disadvantaged. This directly contradicts with our constitutional directives as well as what we stated in our Declaration of Independence. In short, Awami League rulers have failed to rise up to their own declared ideals.

However, during the election campaign, Awami League's leader Sheikh Hasina urged the people of Bangladesh to look at their mistakes leniently. I hope the Awami League government this time will take care not to repeat their past mistakes, which go against the spirit of our Liberation War and create an atmosphere of crisis for democracy and good governance.

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.

The government has turned down Khaleda Zia's family's application to allow her to be taken abroad for urgent treatment, which her lawyer and her party leaders have termed as a political vendetta. The government's reasoning, as explained by Law Minister Anisul Huq, was that the application, on which the government has suspended the jail sentence of Khaleda Zia and released her from jail on two conditions, has been disposed of and has become a "past and closed transaction." The minister also said that the decision to suspend her sentence was made under Section 401(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

This refusal to allow treatment abroad could not have come at a worse time, as the former prime minister's continuous illness has reached a critical stage, with life-threatening conditions. Besides, political distrust and division in the country over the coming election, too, have become highly charged. Against this context, it is hard to discard the notion that politics played no part in this decision from the government.

Read more

‘Govt wants Khaleda dead’

It is still unclear what rekindled the hope of her family and party that the BNP chief's treatment abroad could be possible, despite the fact that several attempts in the past have been flatly rejected by the government, citing the same law and argument which the law minister has referred to in his latest legal opinion. Reportedly, Khaleda Zia told her partymen not to agree to participating in the next parliamentary election under the current government in exchange for her medical care abroad.

It, therefore, begs this question: was the life of a politician, of such stature, really made a bargaining chip by either of the parties? The question became even more pertinent when the law minister, responding to reporters' queries on September 24, said that the government did not receive any application from her family seeking permission to take her abroad.

It followed the government's decision to extend Khaleda Zia's conditional release from prison for six more months, based on a separate application filed on September 4. As a result of the law minister's suggestive remarks that the family had not sought permission for her treatment abroad, Khaleda's younger brother Shamim Iskander made another application on September 25 seeking the required approval.

Read more

Khaleda has to return to jail first if she wants to go abroad for treatment: PM

Should we believe that the issue of seeking permission afresh was brought about simply to humiliate the political opponent by reminding them of how "powerless" they are? Questions may also arise about whether the arguments of considering the petition "disposed of" and "a past and closed transaction" are tenable.

It is often said that the law will take its own course. But examples are plenty to prove that the incident at hand was simply political rhetoric. If someone compares the fate of the 78-year-old former prime minister with that of some other politicians, such as Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal leader ASM Abdur Rab, the irony becomes evident. The JSD leader was allowed to go to then West Germany for treatment while he was serving his prison term awarded by a martial law court. Another politician, Haji Mohammad Selim – who belongs to the ruling party – was not barred from travelling to Bangkok for his treatment despite being convicted and ordered to surrender, and having had a record of fleeing the country during the tenure of the caretaker government between 2006 and 2008.

Law Minister Anisul Huq said, "Once an application is disposed of under Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), there is no scope to reconsider it under the law." Many other jurists, however, do not agree with his interpretation of the law as there is nothing that bars the government or limits its authority to reconsider its decision. Every law is subject to interpretation, and there are variations in interpretations. Among these variations – except the court's interpretation – some are known as literal, and some are mischievous or intended to create mischief.

Read more

Khaleda Zia in politics: Missed chance for BNP?

Amid the contested claims by the government and by BNP, it would be better to read Section 401 of the CrPC and draw one's own conclusion. Under the title "Power to suspend or remit sentences," the law states in Section 401(1), "When any person has been sentenced to punishment for an offence, the Government may at any time without conditions or upon any conditions which the person sentenced accepts, suspend the execution of his sentence or remit the whole or any part of the punishment to which he has been sentenced."

Additionally, Section 401(6) says, "The Government may, by general rules or special orders, give directions as to the suspension of sentences and the conditions on which petitions should be presented and dealt with." As the literal meaning of the rule is far from convincing, it would be wiser for the government to reconsider its decision, which may help improve the current political environment in the country.

Kamal Ahmed is an independent journalist. His X handle is @ahmedka1

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. 

As the country gears up for the 12th parliamentary election, it is disheartening to see the landscape marred by laminated and polythene-coated posters, despite a ban on their use by the Election Commission. The problem has been especially prevalent in Dhaka which has been plastered with such posters mostly by ruling party candidates, and to a lesser degree by independents and candidates from smaller parties. The plastic coating is apparently used to protect posters from being ruined by fog. But that doesn't justify breaching a ban meant to reduce the environmental cost of election campaigning.

Read more

It’s time for election campaigns to go green

The proliferation of such posters, however, is but part of a wider concern about environmental degradation in conventional campaigns. Besides plastic pollution, candidates have also been seen using high-volume microphones and loud music across the city, causing discomfort to the public, especially vulnerable groups like the sick, children, and the elderly. The wide distribution of promotional materials like caps and leaflets, which are invariably thrown away, or irresponsible use of disposable items like cups and plates by supporters is also posing a threat to the health of the city.

Read more

Voters without choice are just glorified dummies

This is totally unacceptable. Candidates, many among them future lawmakers, are expected to lead by example, not encourage or be themselves engaged in breaching environmental regulations. Unfortunately, despite having the scope for alternative, modern campaigning practices using digital platforms, our politicians still seem to prefer conventional methods of public engagement. According to a study by the Environment and Social Development Organization (ESDO), the 2020 mayoral election in Dhaka saw the use of a staggering 340 million plastic-coated posters. The number could double this time, the ESDO warns. During a visit to a number of constituencies in Dhaka, our reporter saw plastic-coated posters being used indiscriminately.

Read more

A Potemkin election in Bangladesh?

Who will take responsibility for the environmental repercussions of such actions? Why is the Election Commission failing to prevent them, or punish non-compliant candidates and parties? Experts talked about the importance of including the ban on plastic use in campaigns, imposed on December 25, in the electoral code of conduct. While this may be the appropriate thing to do, the fact is, without proper enforcement, no amount of lawmaking is good enough. While we expect the EC, particularly returning officers, to play an effective role in ensuring compliance of electoral rules, it is the candidates who must recognise their responsibility in this regard and ensure environmentally friendly campaigning practices.