National election: Isn’t defeat of boat the defeat of Awami League?

In the aftermath of the twelfth national election, various analyses have been circulating. The ruling Awami League asserts that democracy has triumphed, with people rejecting the calls for hartal (shutdown). On the other hand, the opposition party BNP contends that voters have rejected the election. Meanwhile, the Election Commission (EC) claims to have presented a fair and peaceful election to the country's people.

While there may be truths in their respective claims, there are also inherent limitations. Interpretations can vary, and perspectives may lean towards the positive or negative. Some argue that the glass is half empty, while others insist it is half full. The challenge lies in acknowledging whether the glass is indeed half full or half empty. When everyone insists the glass is full, it risks breaking. In electoral politics, the metaphorical glass represents the 'people.'

Democracy is about walking together. Democracy is about working together. But our political leadership is not willing to move or work together. After the fall of the dictatorship in the nineties, the democratic system was supposed to be sustainable. Awami League, BNP and other parties who won the movement also formulated an outline for establishing democracy. They forget that when they come to power. One group allied with anti-independence forces while another group made liaison with the dictatorship.

Awami League and BNP blame each other for destroying the democracy at the same time. This blame-game is not only limited within the country, but also conveyed to the outside world. While in the opposition party, those who run with foreign diplomats to save democracy, when they come to power, they are the ones who raise their voices against foreign interference.

The political distrust and adversary between our main political parties have reached such a level that now Awami League and BNP do not want to participate in the election under the government of each other.

In this context, Indian political analyst SR Sen's article 'Bangladesh: Turnaround and Prospects' written a long time ago is very significant. In April 1991, he wrote, "The unity of the political parties in Bangladesh to end the dictatorial rule of General Ershad in 1990 was unprecedented.

But immediately after the fall of Ershad, during and after the general elections held in January 1991, the unity of those parties shattered and great disunity was seen among them. The matter surprised foreign observers. But to those who have a fair idea of the history and geography of Bangladesh, this was not at all surprising. (Dhaka Courier, 16 April 1991).

SR Sen has seen the politics of Bangladesh very closely. He was a student and teacher of Dhaka University from 1937 to 1948. In 1948, the erstwhile government of Pakistan forced him to leave Dhaka along with late Hussain Shaheed Suhrawardy. After Bangladesh became independent, he was the Executive Director of the World Bank from 1972 to 1978.

History is replete with examples of political leaderships in Bangladesh struggling to march together. A pivotal moment was the aftermath of the 1954 election when the Jukto Front, which emerged victorious, split within a year. The Chhatra League and youth leadership played a crucial role in the Awami League's landslide victory in the 1970 elections. However, after independence, a faction of this young leadership formed JSD under Sirajul Alam Khan's leadership, leading to victories for each side in the other's defeat. This trend persists, albeit with changing teams and leadership, even after four and a half decades.

Apparently, the 7 January election was ‘fair and peaceful.’ In this regard, the contribution of the Election Commission and the contribution of boycotting the election of the opposition parties are being discussed vigorously in the political circles. If the BNP had participated in the election, the whole picture of the vote would have altered. Unlike boats, independent candidates were strictly controlled for the sake of the party. In that case it would be a real equal fight. But the essence of any election is the opportunity to choose one among many, and that was not present in this election.

In this election, 15 of the 44 registered parties did not participate, despite an average of 5 candidates in each seat. Those who participated outside the Awami League, are also members of the 'Awami Family'. As a result, the main competition was between Awami League boat symbol bearers and independent candidates. In that case, the people had only one option to choose—to choose one of the two or more Awami League candidates.

The election was fair but it cannot be called contested. Why would they show interest in the election in which the voters already know who will win? No matter how much BNP criticises, Awami League must think that the 2008 election was an ideal election. The voter turnout in that election was about 87 per cent. And in the election on 7 January, the voter turnout was 41.8 per cent as per CEC's claim. Where did the rest of the votes go?

BNP is saying, people rejected votes by answering their calls. Government says the presence of voters was less due to vandalism and fear of the BNP. What would have happened had the BNP come to the polls is now a matter of 'if' and 'but'. The fact is that the expectation of the larger population of the country, that there will be an election in a festive atmosphere with the participation of all parties, did not happen. The ruling Awami League, the opposition BNP, the Election Commission are all claiming their success in this election. But the people would have won only when the elections would be held in a fear-free environment with the participation of all parties.

This one-sided election also unearthed some brutal truth. First, the failure of the ruling party to nominate the candidates, Awami League’s nomination board fielded boat candidates in 266 seats other than the allies of the 14-party alliance. Among them, one was canceled by the decision of the court and one by the decision of the Election Commission. Out of 264 candidates, 222 have won while 42 lost. Awami League's independent candidates have won all but one of these seats. This means that the Awami League leadership has nominated a less popular candidate by excluding the more popular candidate. Among these are highly trusted candidates of the top leadership.

Isn't it a defeat for the Awami League, which lost in 42 seats? Additionally, the party leadership ordered the withdrawal of candidates from the "boat" symbol in seats allocated to Jatiya Party and the 14-party alliance. Surprisingly, the party candidates accepted this decision without any objection. Moreover, the Awami League leadership provided an opportunity for leaders who didn't secure the party's nomination in these seats to contest as independent candidates. This move has been perceived as a betrayal to alliance partners and an injustice to candidates who withdrew from contesting with the "boat" symbol.

* This op-ed was originally published in the print and online editions of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten in English by Syed Faiz Ahmed