Zilla parishad: What is the need for polls if won without voting

The fact that 25 out of 59 chairman candidates won the zilla parishad elections unopposed is not only unusual but also unwarranted. Out of the country's 64 zilla parishads, all but the three hill districts were scheduled to hold elections on 17 October. But there was no need for voting for 25 chairman posts as there were no rival candidates.

In Feni and Bhola all posts including the zilla parishad chairman had only one candidate for each post. As a result, the election commission did not have to organise the polls there. It goes without saying that those candidates are all leaders and activists of the ruling party, the Awami League. In the remaining 23 districts, voting was held for all other posts except for that of the chairman.

The difference of zilla parishad from other local government bodies is that it is elected through indirect voting. Union parishad chairman, members, upazila parishad chairman, vice chairman, city corporation, municipal mayor and councilors are its voters. It is very similar to the style of basic democracy introduced by the military ruler Ayub Khan during the Pakistan period. We have introduced direct voting system in all level but have left an exception in zilla parishad for reasons unknown. This is the second election after the zilla parishad act was passed and both times the main opposition party boycotted it.

Local government bodies in Bangladesh were elected in a non-partisan manner from the beginning. After Awami League came to power, it has almost merged with the ruling party.

Many people are calling zilla parishad as the rehabilitation centre of the ruling party as those who did not get place in the Jatiya Sangsad, city corporation, municipality, upazila parishad are accommodated at zilla parishad. The election results showed that out of 59 zilla parishads, AL nominated candidates won in 49. Awami League rebel candidates won in six districts. Outside the Awami League, one from the Jatiya Party and three independent candidates won in the polls.

Questions have also been raised about the rationale of holding an election of which results have already been determined. It is more important that whether the election is participatory and competitive rather than the results.

The election commission has expressed satisfaction that there was no chaos in the zilla parishad elections. But the people will not be convinced at all in such an election. The image of damaged electoral system will not be restored either.

Even if there is no skirmish in the zilla parishad elections, the way the mayor of Barisal has threatened an incumbent UNO and used indecent language towards him, no self-respecting government official will want to perform this duty. The election commission should investigate the matter and take necessary action. No government official or public representative is above the law.

It is time to think about local government or local governance alongside bringing transparency in the election process of the local government bodies. To strengthen the local government or governance, their power should also be increased.

The central government should reduce its domination. Despite having financial capacity, many local government organisations have to wait for the decision of the ministry and the central government in almost every work. It is against the concept of decentralisation.

It is time for thinking out a new way to make local government organisations effective and sustainable. It cannot be allowed to continue like this.