Khulna model replicated in Gazipur city polls

After the 15 June Khulna city corporation polls, the Gazipur election was held on 26 June. It has been said that the Gazipur polls were on the lines of the Khulna model, that is, a ‘controlled election’. In the interests of rendering our democratic system effective and meaningful, it is imperative to bring an end to such 'controlled elections'.

What does the ‘Khulna model’ mean? What are its characteristics? Broadly speaking, the Khulna model has five main characteristics:

Using the police to drive away the opposition

As in Khulna, this happened in Gazipur too. For instance, on the day that the court suspended the Gazipur elections, the police swarmed the area around the house of BNP candidate Hasan Uddin Sarkar and picked up 13 BNP men including the party’s vice chairman Abdullah Al Noman, charging them with setting a ‘laguna’ vehicle on fire. Noman was released after six hours, but the remaining 12 were included in a list of 103, charged under the Special Powers Act the next day by the Tongi police. Of these accused, 48 were members of the BNP’s committee for the candidate’s election campaign. Ironically, the ‘laguna’ was later found in perfect condition at the Tongi police station.

The BNP also alleged that the police had detained nine members of the party’s election committee from the early hours of 20 June, showing them to be arrested in various cases filed in neighbouring districts. This created an alarming situation. BNP leaders and activists were forced out of the area before the election, hampering their election campaign just before the polls. Violating the High Court's directives against arresting anyone before the elections, many BNP persons were reportedly detained, even on the very day of the election.

Polling agents obstructed

In Gazipur too, polling agents were harassed in various ways. Many were prevented from entering the polling stations or driven out of the centres. Many were detained by the law enforcement, only to be released after the voting. Many turned up at the Keraniganj central jail. It was heard that over 100 of the BNP polling agents were picked up on the day of the election in Gazipur. In absence of the polling agents, it is quite possible to carry out all sorts of irregularities and even increase the number of votes in favour of any particular candidate. This is exactly what happened in at least two centres of Gazipur, according to observation reports of the Election Working Group (EWG). Rigging the election is possible when the polling agents are absent.

Using force on election day

According to media reports, after the Khulna election, force was used on behalf of the ruling coterie. Centres were taken over and false votes were cast, terror was created inside and outside the polling stations, voters were obstructed from casting their votes and a host of other discrepancies took place. As a result, though 57.2 per cent votes were cast according to the election commission, an abnormally high number of votes were cast in certain centres. One of the main features of an election where ballot papers are forcefully stamped, is that along with the increase in the rate of votes cast, the votes in favour of the winning candidate also increase exponentially and the closest contender’s votes decrease drastically, as in the case of Gazipur. For instance, in two centres where 20 to 30 per cent of the votes were cast, Jahangir Alam gained 33 per cent more votes that Hasan Uddin Sarkar. In 124 centres where 30 to 50 per cent of the votes were cast, the difference between Alam’s votes and that of Sarkar was 51 per cent. In 111 centres where 50 to 60 per cent votes were cast, the difference was 89 per cent. In 177 centres where 70 to 90 per cent were cast, the difference was 158 per cent. And in two centres where 90 per cent votes were cast, the difference was a wide as 309 per cent.

Briefly, in the centre where the least votes were cast Hasan Uddin Sarkar secured 100 votes as opposed to Jahangir Alam’s 133, but this gap steadily widened in other votes in proportion to the higher number of votes cast, the widest ratio being 100:409. We feel the election commission should certainly conduct a probe into the centres where the highest number of votes was cast.

Silent role of the EC

The election commission (EC) has remained more or less silent on all the allegations of irregularities, harassment by the law enforcement agencies and other excesses. For example, though there were complaints against the law enforcement agencies in Gazipur for harassing and arresting the opposition leaders and workers, the election commission only issued a directive against arresting anyone without a warrant just a day before the election. That’s like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. Though repeated complaints were leveled against the Gazipur SP, the commission took no action, even though the past controversial election commission of Rakibuddin had transferred him during an election.

After the Khulna election, the election commission took no speedy action against anyone accused of misconduct, despite provisions for such action in the city corporation election rules.

Hostage to development carrot

A deluge of development promises also had an impact on the Gazipur election. Over the past five years, the BNP-nominated mayor underwent all sorts of harassment. Cases had been filed against him, he was arrested, removed from office and placed behind bars. In the process, the people of Gazipur were deprived of development. The message to the people was clear: If you want development, vote for the ruling party candidate. Dilapidated roads, pitiful sewerage, piles of garbage and the overall deplorable state of Gazipur have held the people there hostage and the ruling party is cashing in on their predicament.

Clearly, it was possible to replicate the Khulna model due to the inefficacy of the election commission. The election laws give the commission highest authority during the elections. For example, in the city corporation elections, the law enforcement agencies and officials of the administration in the concerned areas and all persons involved in election duties are placed under control of the election commission.

Unfortunately, the rules say one thing and reality another. This was glaringly obvious in the Khulna and Gazipur city elections where the commission desisted from wielding its authority. If the commission took speedy steps against those involved in election crimes in Khulna, these wouldn’t have been repeated in Gazipur. Gazipur would have seen the way to a free and fair election.

It is clear that the lack of development during the last mayor’s term, the wealth and power of the ruling party candidate Jahangir Alam, his extensive campaigning and various social development activities, had put the ruling party in an advantageous position. They may have won the election anyway. But the excesses of their activists and the election commission’s subservient one-sided stance, has cast a shade on their victory.

We hope that the election commission ensures a credible election in the upcoming city corporation elections of Sylhet, Rajshahi and Barisal, and prevents a replication of the Khulna model. Unfortunately, already election-related arrests have begun in Sylhet and Rajshahi and it has been alleged that certain councilors have been forced to withdraw their nomination papers in Barisal. We hope the commission looks into these matters immediately.

* Badiul Alam Majumdar is secretary, Citizens for Good Governance (SUJON). This article, originally published in Prothom Alo print edition, has been rewritten in English by Ayesha Kabir