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.

After having weathered a difficult 15 years in the opposition camp, it is natural that there would be chaos in a big party like BNP as it goes about reorganising its house with an eye on the next election. But after over two months since the fall of Awami League, BNP still seems nowhere close to establishing internal discipline. Rather, reports of widespread extortion, infighting, and other illegal and unruly activities by party members are overshadowing its pro-people messages to become the dominant narrative surrounding the party. If morning shows the day, then critics are perhaps right to wonder if a BNP regime would be significantly different from the one it helped to oust.

Read more

BNP faces the weight of history and expectations

This concern has again come to the fore after a report by Prothom Alo revealed how two BNP leaders, including the convener of BNP's recently-dissolved Dhaka North unit, have taken over extortion operations at key transportation hubs in Dhaka, including the Mohakhali bus terminal, where over a million taka is allegedly collected every day. After August 5, they took control of the Dhaka Road Transport Owners' Association. They also established control over local businesses and even mosques in areas previously controlled by Awami League's inner circle. At the terminals, extortion is taking place in various forms, such as charging fees for using illegally set facilities like toilets and showers, entry or exit fees for long-distance buses, etc. Clearly, little has changed in terms of abuse of power after the regime power.

Read more

BNP must control errant party activists

This is despite what appears to have been a large-scale purge within the party. To date, according to another report by Prothom Alo, some 1,023 leaders have faced various disciplinary actions over the past two months—with 523 receiving show-cause notices, 437 expelled, 24 suspended, 35 warned, and four served notice for breaching party discipline. There have been even instances of dissolution of entire committees. Despite all such measures, the persistence of unruly activities by party members points to deep-seated structural issues within the BNP that need to be resolved first.

Read more

Stop political capture of the public sector

The time has come for a critical rethink by the BNP leadership. They must recognise that the stakes now are higher than ever. If BNP cannot get its house in order, it risks alienating not just the reformists within the party but the broader population who expect real change after decades of political instability and corruption in the country. So, besides ensuring sustained disciplinary actions, BNP must find out what's emboldening errant party members and undertake comprehensive reforms by placing ethical and democratic conduct at the heart of its operations.

The recent killing of a Jubo League leader in Natore, allegedly by BNP-linked men, serves as another grim reminder of the cycle of political retribution that has followed the fall of the Awami League regime, in what appears to be a tit-for-tat response to how Awami League had treated BNP and its affiliates while in power. According to a report, the victim, Saidur Rahman Babu, succumbed to his injuries on Wednesday after a brutal assault. He had been in hiding since his home was attacked on August 5, but on October 30, he was caught by his assailants, tied to an electric pole, and beaten with sticks and iron rods. Saidur's family accused Kabir Hossain Kangal, a Jubo Dal leader, of leading the assault and previously demanding Tk 5 lakh in exchange for his safety.

Read more

BNP faces the weight of history and expectations

These vengeful incidents are showing little sign of abating even after three months. It's quite frustrating for those who had expected the culture of political repression to end with the end of an autocrat's rule, paving the way for a politics that truly serves public interests. The ongoing violence and harassment targeting the once-ruling camp raise concerns about a likely resurgence of authoritarianism under different banners. Almost every day, we get to see some troubling sign of authoritarian tendencies—murder, vandalism, threats, opportunistic extortion, forced takeover of properties, frivolous lawsuits, etc. Data from the rights group Manabadhikar Shongskriti Foundation (MSF) also reflects the persistent nature of these politically motivated crimes, with at least 12 fatalities in October, nine linked to Awami League alone.

Read more

A call to end the cycle of revenge politics

This, on a broader level, aligns with how political parties that were part of the AL-led 14-party alliance are being targeted, with a report by this daily revealing that many party offices were vandalised, abandoned, and even repurposed. Some public outbursts towards these parties were expected because of their role over the past 15 years, and particularly their complicity or silence during the brutal killings of students and other ordinary citizens during the July-August uprising. But what's happening now seems more politically designed, which is concerning.

Read more

BNP’s unfolding strategic stance: Straddling the aftermath of a revolutionary ‘event’ and realpolitik

We, therefore, call on the interim government and leading political parties to break this cycle of retributive violence. The BNP secretary general on Thursday said that party leaders and activists have "taken a fresh vow to resist hegemonic forces" and safeguard democracy. We appreciate the gesture but would like to see matching actions on the ground. Political parties, including BNP, that once suffered heavily during Awami League's rule must ensure that they don't end up repeating its wrongs. The onus also falls on the government to establish accountability of the excesses being committed, particularly by ensuring thorough investigations and fair trials for all political killings as well as punitive action against anyone committing or inciting political violence.

That a day would come when the Election Commission would do anything beyond perfunctory efforts to stop electoral irregularities was unthinkable even a few days ago. But the unthinkable has happened. The suspension of the Gaibandha-5 by-poll, after voting was stopped in 50 out of 145 centres amid widespread irregularities and a mass boycott by all but one candidate, is an extraordinary move, an exercise of the highest power granted to the EC. We welcome the EC for showing such courage – a rarity for bureaucrats-turned-commissioners – which is perhaps the only silver lining to an otherwise botched operation. But courage alone will not be enough to ensure fair elections, nor can it make up for the EC's – and by extension, the administration's – inability to control the Gaibandha situation.   

Read more

Situation went ‘out of control’

The suspension decision has, justifiably, stunned both political parties and election observers, who noted its unprecedented nature in the recent history of parliamentary elections. But too much focus on the merits of the decision risks taking away from the fact that serious irregularities did occur, in the presence of election and law enforcement officials no less. The EC cited irregularities including illegal presence of individuals in polling booths, voters being forced to vote for a certain candidate, criminals cutting the cables of CCTV cameras, etc. The situation was "out of control", it said. Some candidates also alleged that their agents were forced out of the centres. An independent candidate even said that Awami League men didn't allow him to cast his own vote.

Read more

Is Gaibandha-5 by-poll a prelude to the main show?

So, while it's true that the EC took a drastic decision in its first brush with parliamentary elections, it is also true that it did so in the face of tremendous odds. If this is a sign of things to come, we have every reason to worry about the upcoming national election. Right now, the challenge for the EC is to get the Gaibandha-5 by-poll back on track. But it also has to investigate all reported irregularities and the potential complicity of election officials, and punish those responsible. Otherwise, all this will amount to nothing but a token concession to disgruntled opposition parties.

Read more

‘I must thank the Election Commission’

Until Wednesday, the EC largely appeared to be appeasing the ruling party in election-related decisions. It allowed the use of electronic voting machines (EVMs) in the upcoming national election, despite protests from most political parties. It refused to punish high-profile violators of electoral codes. It failed to send a strong message to field-level administrators – deputy commissioners (DCs) and superintendents of police (SPs) – after their grievous misconduct in a recent conference. As well as setting examples of neutrality and transparency in all its actions and preventing any collusion among election officials and the ruling party, the EC also has to figure out a way to secure unconditional support from the administration.

This is a tall order indeed, and we remain unconvinced that the EC can navigate all these challenges and hold fair elections on its own. This is why the support of all stakeholders, especially the ruling party and the administration, is vital. The public has grown tired of watching violent and non-participatory elections year after year. The authorities must find a way to avoid that in the future.

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.