Armed forces’ power to increase during elections, proposes EC

The Election Commission (EC) has finalised a proposal to add “army, navy, and air force” to the definition of “law enforcement agencies” in the Representation of the People Order (RPO), the election-related law.

Once included in the law, there will be no need for a separate order to assign election duties to the three armed forces.

Additionally, members of the armed forces will be able to serve at polling centers like the police and have the power to arrest without a warrant.

The EC approved the proposal to amend the RPO in a meeting yesterday, Monday.

In addition to including the armed forces in the definition, the meeting approved several other proposals including introducing a “No” vote option if there is only one candidate in a constituency, increasing the EC’s power to halt voting, clarifying the penalties for election officials, and removing all provisions related to the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).

However, these will only be incorporated into the law after the President issues an ordinance.

Following yesterday’s meeting, election commissioner Abul Fazal Md Sanaullah briefed journalists about the EC’s decisions.

The EC had previously discussed the amendments last Thursday but postponed the discussion, which resumed yesterday morning and ended around 7:00 pm.

The Electoral System Reform Commission had recommended defining the armed forces in the law and making several other changes to the RPO. However, not all of its recommendations were adopted in full.

Sanaullah stated that the EC made decisions on issues not requiring national consensus. Other RPO-related provisions may come from the National Consensus Commission, and the EC is considering these as well. The EC hopes to finalise the draft amendments to the RPO and send it to the Law Ministry by next week. If the Consensus Commission makes any decisions and requests the EC, those will also be presented for amendment.

Usually, before amending election laws, the EC prepares a draft proposal, which is vetted by the Law Ministry and then submitted to the Cabinet for approval before being placed in Parliament. However, the law is not always passed exactly as proposed by the EC — the Cabinet or Parliament may make changes. Since Parliament is currently dissolved, the EC’s proposal will go to the Advisory Council of the interim government, and the necessary amendments will be made through a presidential ordinance. The extent of the amendments will largely depend on the interim government.

EC officials said the armed forces were included in the definition of law enforcement agencies in the RPO in 2001, but this provision remained only until 2008. It was removed in 2009 during the Awami League government. Without this definition in the law, deploying the army in elections is not mandatory. In pre-election dialogues for the last three national elections, many stakeholders demanded that the armed forces be defined as part of the law enforcement agencies.

The existing law defines law enforcement agencies as the police, Armed Police Battalion, Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), Ansar, Battalion Ansar, Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB), and Coast Guard.

Under section 87 of the RPO, members of law enforcement agencies — even if not police officers — who are performing election duties may arrest anyone without a warrant within 400 yards of a polling station on election day for certain specified election offenses or for maintaining peace and order. If the amendment is passed as proposed, the armed forces will also have these powers during elections.

Even without being defined in the law, the army was deployed in parliamentary elections after the ninth parliament under the “in aid to civil power” provision. In such deployments, they serve as a striking force, not stationed inside polling stations. They are positioned in designated areas in electoral regions, patrol when necessary, and act under the instructions of the returning officer or magistrate.

Major General (retd) Fazle Elahi Akbar, Chairman of the Foundation for Strategic and Development Studies (FSDS), told Prothom Alo that keeping the army only as a striking force would create opportunities for disorder and waste large sums of money. He believes the army should be defined as a law enforcement agency and be given responsibility, along with other forces, to create a level playing field for elections. This, he said, would encourage people to vote.

At a Prothom Alo roundtable titled “July uprising: One year of experience and the future” on 23 July, economist Debapriya Bhattacharya said that broader and more effective participation of the army was necessary for holding a peaceful and secure election. Speaking to Prothom Alo yesterday, he noted that the police’s organisational capacity and morale are currently low, and the law-and-order situation is poor. In such a scenario, the size and capacity of law enforcement agencies must be expanded, and the army’s role will be critical. He described the current deployment of the army with magistracy powers as recognition of this need.

Debapriya said, “I think the army should remain an engaged force in the election. They should be tasked with recovering illegal weapons three months before the vote and should remain on the ground for at least 10 days after the vote.”

He also expressed hope that the army would be included in the local coordination committees for law and order during the election period.
In the 2024 election, the army was deployed as a strike force for 13 days, from 29  December to 10 January. In the 2018 election, they were deployed from 24 December until 2 January of the following year. According to a Prothom Alo report published on 21 December, 2013, the army was deployed for 15 days in the 2001 election and 12 days in 2008.

During the army-backed caretaker government, the law allowed voters to cast a “No” vote if they did not support any candidate. This provision was abolished in 2009. The Electoral System Reform Commission recommended reinstating it, and the EC has proposed partially restoring it.
Sanaullah told journalists that the “No” vote provision will apply if there is only one candidate in a constituency — they will not be elected unopposed; instead, they must face the “No” option.

Sanaullah said the EC has proposed restoring its previous powers to suspend or cancel election results, which had been restricted. The EC will be able to halt voting or cancel results at one or more polling stations or an entire constituency as necessary.

He also said that the EC has proposed allowing accredited observers and journalists to enter polling stations, with media personnel allowed to be present during vote counting — but they must remain from start to finish and cannot leave midway.

Other proposals include adding penalties for violating the electoral code of conduct, holding fresh elections in case of a tie, specifying how the EC will audit candidates’ election expenses, requiring party donations to be received through banks and declared in tax returns, and requiring parties in an alliance to contest under their own symbols.

The EC has also clarified what will happen if a party’s activities are banned, as the law only specifies what to do if a party is dissolved. For example, after the Awami League’s organisational activities were banned, the EC suspended its registration.

Another proposed change is to allow the cancellation of a candidate’s nomination — even after election — if they are found to have provided false information in their affidavit. Sanaullah noted there are also some minor amendments.

The meeting, chaired by Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) AMM Nasir Uddin, was attended by Election Commissioners Abdur Rahmanel Machud, Tahmida Ahmed, Md Anwarul Islam Sarkar, EC Secretary Akhtar Ahmed, and other officials.