EC, BNP on the same page over several reform proposals

The Electoral Reform Commission has proposed several new provisions aimed at enhancing the accountability of the Election Commission (EC). However, the EC has objected to these proposals, arguing that their implementation would compromise its independence.

The BNP also expressed similar reservations during its discussions with the National Consensus Commission. On this issue, the EC and the BNP appear to be aligned.

After assuming office, the interim government formed six reform commissions in October to draft recommendations for reforms in various sectors. One of them—the Electoral Reform Commission—was led by Badiul Alam Majumder.

It submitted a summary of its recommendations on 15 January, followed by a full report on 8 February, making over 200 proposals across 16 areas.

One key focus area was the accountability of the Election Commission. The current legal framework does not clearly define mechanisms for holding this constitutional body accountable.

To address this gap, the Reform Commission recommended that the EC’s legal, financial, and administrative proposals be submitted not to a ministry, but to an all-party parliamentary committee chaired by the Speaker of the Jatiya Sangsad. This committee would then hold discussions with the EC and forward the proposals to the relevant authorities for necessary action.

In addition, the Reform Commission proposed enforcing the existing provision that allows the Supreme Judicial Council to address allegations of misconduct against commissioners during their tenure.

It also recommended empowering a parliamentary committee to investigate and take appropriate action in cases where commissioners, after their term, are accused of failing to fulfill constitutional responsibilities or violating their oath of office.

The Election Commission strongly objected to these proposals. Following the publication of the summary report, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) AMM Nasir Uddin stated on 26 January that the implementation of several recommendations would significantly undermine the EC’s independence.

He specifically objected to the proposal to place the EC’s financial matters under a parliamentary committee, the recommendation to authorise that committee to investigate allegations against former commissioners, and the suggestion to establish a separate authority for delimiting parliamentary constituencies.

Later, on 17 March, the EC sent a letter to the National Consensus Commission, formally expressing its disagreement with 28 of the Reform Commission’s recommendations. Among these, it specifically objected to the proposals aimed at increasing the EC's accountability.

According to sources familiar with the letter, the EC argued that granting a parliamentary committee authority over its financial matters could open the door to undue political influence. It maintained that financial oversight is the responsibility of the executive, not the legislature.

The EC also warned that empowering a parliamentary committee to investigate the commission would undermine its institutional independence. It further noted that existing laws already allow for appropriate action in the event of misconduct after a commissioner’s term ends.

The BNP’s position on the proposal to make the Election Commission (EC) accountable largely mirrors that of the EC itself. In a meeting held last Tuesday with the National Consensus Commission, the party expressed its disagreement with the recommendation to place the EC under the oversight of a parliamentary committee. The BNP argued that the Election Commission is an independent constitutional body and should not be made answerable to a parliamentary committee. Any such provision, it stated, could undermine the EC’s independence.

The Reform Commission also proposed the creation of a separate, independent body to determine the boundaries of parliamentary constituencies in the future. In response, the EC wrote to the Consensus Commission rejecting the idea, stating that delineating constituencies is a constitutional responsibility entrusted solely to the Election Commission. Delegating this task to another authority, it said, would diminish the EC’s constitutional mandate. The BNP echoed this view during its discussion with the Consensus Commission.

Following the meeting, BNP Standing Committee member Salahuddin Ahmed told Prothom Alo that empowering a parliamentary committee in this way could threaten the EC’s autonomy. He added that any misconduct during a commissioner’s tenure can already be addressed through the Supreme Judicial Council, and post-tenure issues can be handled under existing laws.

On the matter of redrawing constituency boundaries, he reiterated that this falls squarely within the EC’s constitutional jurisdiction. Creating a new authority, he warned, would result in two bodies operating in the same domain.

 The Electoral Reform Commission proposed defining certain responsibilities of the Election Commission (EC), one of which involves verifying the fairness and acceptability of national elections. According to the proposal, within 48 hours of the election’s conclusion—but before the results are officially published in the gazette—the EC should issue a public notice certifying the election’s fairness, credibility, and acceptability.

Under this proposal, if any political party participating in the election is dissatisfied with the EC’s certification, it would be allowed to lodge a complaint with either the National Constitutional Council or the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court within 48 hours. The respective authority would then be required to resolve the complaint within seven working days.

The EC expressed its formal objection to this proposal in its letter to the National Consensus Commission, calling the provision unnecessary. It argued that the commission already publishes results in the gazette only after being fully satisfied with the electoral process. Creating a separate certification step, it warned, would open the door for political parties to raise unwarranted objections and further complicate the electoral process.

Sources within the BNP also confirmed that the party disagrees with this recommendation. According to the BNP, election-day results are announced in stages—first by presiding officers at polling centres, then by returning officers at the district level, and finally by the EC at the national level. Once satisfied with the final results submitted by returning officers, the EC publishes them through a gazette notification, which serves as de facto certification. Introducing a separate 48-hour verification process would, in the party’s view, create unnecessary complications.

The BNP further argued that if political parties were allowed to file complaints about the fairness and acceptability of the election within 48 hours, it could delay or obstruct the finalisation of the election process. Under current law, individual candidates or aggrieved parties may lodge formal complaints—not political parties as a whole.

On the broader issue of EC accountability, the BNP and the Election Commission appear to hold closely aligned positions. When asked about this similarity, BNP Standing Committee member Salahuddin Ahmed told Prothom Alo, “The Election Commission has long experience in handling these matters and exercises them regularly. They understand these processes better than political parties. BNP has analysed the reform proposals from its own perspective, and it just so happens that our analysis aligns with the EC’s. Nothing more.”

The term of the Electoral Reform Commission has already ended. According to sources within the commission, the recommendations regarding EC accountability were made because the existing legal framework lacks clear provisions to hold the Election Commission accountable. As a result, the EC has allegedly evaded responsibility for various irregularities, particularly during the last three national elections.

One member of the Reform Commission said that a review of past electoral processes revealed a pattern in which the EC deflected responsibility onto returning officers. The EC’s position has often been that, once the election results are published in the official gazette, it has no further role or obligation. This, the source explained, was a key reason behind the commission’s proposal to introduce a formal certification process by the EC.

On the issue of empowering a parliamentary committee to investigate the EC, the Reform Commission noted in its report that similar accountability mechanisms exist in several democratic countries. The commission emphasised that in any democracy, no institution should be beyond accountability.