Low voter turnout was inevitable

That voter turnout in Saturday's election would not be satisfactory was a foregone conclusion, given that people in general have lost confidence in the electoral system. The manner in which the last general election as well as some of the local elections in recent years were held has, in fact, significantly eroded people's trust in the idea of an election. So, people did not go to the polling centres, not in large numbers anyway. They already knew their opinion would not be reflected in the election.

Generally, people do not seem to give much importance to the city corporation elections. But what was worse this time is that they didn't have much idea about the candidates either. In the past, aspiring ward councillors and their supporters would keep the electioneering scene vibrant by going from door to door and providing the voters with voting slips. I don't think the candidates did it this time. In fact, many people were confused. They did not know which candidate belonged to which party even as they went to the polling centres.

Electioneering was almost dominated by the candidates of one party. In the area where I live, I haven't seen much activity from the opposition candidates. There were no posters of the opposition candidates and people could see that there was no level playing field. It was evident that an environment in which people would be inspired to vote willingly, for the candidates of their choice, could not be created.

It's not just that they did not go to vote due to their lack of trust in the system, they were also annoyed at the way the campaigns were held. The wastefulness of the campaigns was visible everywhere you turned. While the mayoral and councillor candidates made promises to improve the city's environment if elected, during their campaigns they did things that were completely opposite to their pledges. The way posters, especially laminated ones, were hung all over the streets and loudspeakers were used was harmful to the environment. It continues to be. We need to understand that Dhaka has become unliveable and those who will be elected should be committed to making the city liveable again. Sadly, through their campaigns the candidates have given the public an impression that they are not capable of taking up that challenge.

Moreover, people had doubt about the use of EVM in the election. They did not have prior experience of using the technology. There was also doubt about the efficacy of EVM—whether proper machines were bought, whether there is any mechanism to oversee it, etc. EVM came with a questionable reputation, and the Election Commission has made sure that question mark was never erased. The manner in which the EVM issue was handled from the start raised questions in people's minds, which could potentially be a reason for the low voter turnout.

Overall, I would say, the performance of the EC was very unsatisfactory. It was clear that the EC was not functioning properly. The rules of electioneering were not maintained by the EC and they also made some irresponsible comments. They did not take into account violations of the electoral code of conduct by candidates and their supporters. No one was held accountable for the violence during the campaigns and for attacking some of the candidates.

People expect the EC to work independently, without the influence of the government. The EC should take responsibility for everything involved with the election and the administration should listen to them and provide all kinds of assistance. Sadly, they failed to do their duty and lost people's trust.

Professor Serajul Islam Chowdhury is Professor Emeritus, University of Dhaka

(Interviewed by Naznin Tithi)