Where's EC's independent entity
Where is the independent entity of the election commission (EC) with regard to its jurisdiction over holding the Dhaka North City Corporation election?
Of all the constitutional bodies, the election commission is unique for several reasons. The people always do have an interest in its role, and steps. The issue of its dependence on the government, in particular, for running its activities is widely discussed.
Following the recent controversies surrounding possible use of electronic voting machine (EVM) in the general elections, the latest debate is about the date for holding parliamentary polls. The chief election commissioner expressed his annoyance after a senior minister made remarks on the voting date.
The commission, through the activities since its formation, has shown its knack for giving priority to the ruling party’s concerns. This is more or less applicable for each of the local government polls or election-centric activities of the commission.
Overall, the commission’s independent entity has been obviously questioned. It is only natural that the leadership of the government in running the affairs of the state and that of the EC in conducting elections is supposed to be clear to the people.
But, the government's influence, as prove several incidents, has been higher than the EC's in formulating different policies relating to the elections. There is hardly any precedent that the commission has made the government follow something it (govt) was unwilling to. It (EC) has neither been able to prove its engagement in any legal process initiated by itself as per law.
The election to the Dhaka North City Corporation proves to be such an issue.
Following the death of mayor Annisul Huq on 30 November, the EC later announced the by-election schedule for DNCC. Voting for the vacant mayoral post as well as those of 36 newly created posts of ward councillors of the two city corporations in Dhaka and 12 reserved posts was scheduled to be held on 26 February.
Two writ petitions were then filed with the High Court challenging legality of the schedule. The court, on 17 January, postponed the election following the writs.
Reports in the newspaper show the EC failed to secure the safeguard stated in the constitution about postponement of election without a proper hearing from the EC.
The commission, apparently to avoid its responsibility, took cover behind the court, the way the executive does. We did not see the EC lawyer taking a strong position in the hearing as to why the election process should not be halted.
The EC had the opportunity to point out that the writ petitioners did not come with 'clean hands'. Presumably, the ruling party, in an election year, was not willing to accept any electoral defeat especially in the capital nor did it want to stage a controversial election.
However, the EC filed an appeal petition against the HC judgement, in view of the hostile media reaction to the EC's reluctance (to holding the polls). None from the EC spokespersons confirmed as to whether the commission tried to hold the hearing, shrugging off the state’s lack of interest in bringing forward the matter.
We've been stunned to know, from the EC sources, that the six-month stay order on the DNCC election issued by the court in January expired on 8 September. The EC did not try to see resumption of hearing and rather the court has recently extended the deadline in favour of the petitioners.
That means, the right to elect their mayor still eludes the Dhaka city dwellers.
We hope the EC will play its appropriate role in the legal battle to ensure holding of the DNCC election. Otherwise, its independence will remain a question mark.