A good or proper election means an election in which the opinions of the people are properly reflected. That is possible when the election becomes free, fair and participatory. If there is a deviation of any of these, the election cannot be considered as a good one or proper reflection of public opinion and this election does not get acceptance at home and abroad. The constitution and the law can give legitimacy to any kind of election. However, this cannot always ensure that a good election has been held.
What do we understand about a participatory election? The participation of all types of political parties is important here. The current government claims that the participation of a big portion of the people is a participatory election, there is no need the participation of all political parties. The people generally don't feel encouraged to exercise their franchise unless there are opportunities to choose from a sufficient number of alternative candidates fielded by different political parties.
Was the election participatory or not? The election commission has said the presence of voters on an average is 42 per cent. However, our candidates-supporters and most of the voters think this estimation is exaggeration. If the estimation is considered correct, still a large number of voters were out of the voting process.
Statistics of national elections
55.54 per cent of voters was counted in the 5th parliamentary election held on 27 February 1991, 75.60 per cent in the 7th parliamentary election held on 12 June 1996, 74.73 per cent in the 8th parliamentary election held on 1 October 2001 and 86.34 per cent in the 9th parliamentary election held on 29 December 2008. These elections were accepted at home and abroad. So the participation of 41.8 per cent of voters cannot be said to be adequate.
The claim of casting 42 per cent of votes is not realistic. Rather 5 to 10 per cent of voters have cast votes. Many witnesses think 20 per cent of votes have been counted in some areas. Questions naturally come up about how 42 per cent of votes have been estimated. It is possible if ballot papers are stamped illegally and shown in favour of the candidates. Or people related to the election make results and announce it without counting the ballot papers
Foreign minister Hasan Mahmud has said something about the presence of voters in the parliament. He has given statistics of voters' presence in some countries, which is less than our current election. As a result, he has claimed the 12th parliament election has been participatory. In the US election, generally 25 to 30 per cent of voters cast their votes. With the presence of these voters, they claim the overall opinions of the people have been reflected. On the contrary, 100 per cent presence of voters is required for proper election in Australia. As a result, the casting of vote has been made mandatory there. The presence of voters for acceptable election differs from one country to another. It is logical to consider the lowest presence of voters in those national elections which were acceptable. For that reason, we cannot agree to the claim of the foreign minister.
How credible is the 42 per cent vote count
There were 119.6 million voters in the 12th parliamentary election. According to the government, 50 million votes have been counted. The number of election booths is 2,61,564. A total of 191 votes have been counted in each booth in 8 hours. On an average 24 votes have been counted in each booth in every hour. According to the estimation, it takes 2.30 minutes to cast a vote.
According to the estimation, it requires at least 2.30 to 3 minutes to cast a vote. So time is alright for counting 42 per cent of the vote. For casting such an amount of votes, voting is supposed to be continued uninterrupted in each booth of a polling centre across the country. Due to the presence of voters more or less in some areas, to maintain the average estimation, voters are supposed to be waiting to cast their votes even after the stipulated time of eight hours. According to the electoral rules, the counting of votes may continue to facilitate the voters to cast their votes even after stipulated time of voting.
Nobody claimed that he or she had seen a long queue or waiting for casting votes in any voting centre in any place of the country for eight hours or after the stipulated time. According to witnesses, generally on average not more than three to six people had been seen to cast their vote in booths or polling stations. On an average, 12 votes have been cast in some areas. The general voters could not cast votes after reaching the vote centre in most of the areas after a certain period. They alleged votes had been cast illegally after occupying the voting centres.
Alarming realisation
The claim of casting 42 per cent of votes is not realistic. Rather 5 to 10 per cent of voters have cast votes. Many witnesses think 20 per cent of votes have been counted in some areas. Questions naturally come up about how 42 per cent of votes have been estimated. It is possible if ballot papers are stamped illegally and shown in favour of the candidates. Or people related to the election make results and announce it without counting the ballot papers.
So there is a logic to fear that a lot of votes, which the voters have not cast, have been shown in the result. The candidates in favour of whom votes have been shown have won the election. So it cannot be said that the 12th parliamentary election has been participatory.
There was an environment of fair and neutral election in very few areas. That has happened due to the the government. There were no government candidates or independent candidates indirectly in the name of government in these areas. The ruling party candidates were the main candidates in some areas. Although elections can be said to be free, fair and neutral in these areas, the election cannot be called participatory.
Elections have been held openly in a big portion of election areas. There was no obligation to follow the electoral rules and regulations in those areas. The use of illegal money and muscle power has not been barred. The candidates tried to win in their respective styles and won the election. In many places Awami League leaders and activists have worked as hired soldiers and they worked for the candidates from whom they have got much facilities. The ruling party candidates did not contest in these areas, there were so called rebel candidates in the name of independent candidates or Jatiya Party or other independent candidates.
So there is a logic to fear that a lot of votes, which the voters have not cast, have been shown in the result. The candidates in favour of whom votes have been shown have won the election. So it cannot be said that the 12th parliamentary election has been participatory.
I have said and explained earlier that there was a scope to illegally show additional ballot papers in favour of candidates as there was the presence of low rate of voters and unutilised ballot papers in most of the areas. There is a reason to think that there was an urge for the administration to show the presence of voters high. So officials related to the election have got an opportunity to use unused ballot papers as per their wish.
Overall, the election was influenced and controlled by the government. There was no judicial verdict on the above mentioned allegations and these have no credibility in legal point of view. In that perspective, the 12th parliament election can be called legal as per the constitution and the existing law. But most of the people don't consider this election a good election.
Conventional electoral rules have been violated extensively. The officials in charge have ignored the rules. There are allegations that people in charge themselves have violated the rules. The related rules and even the constitution may be amended to hold a better election in future.
*This article, originally published in Prothom Alo print and online editions, has been rewritten in English by Rabiul Islam