A ‘successful’ election and a few questions

A feast was arranged at police headquarters in Dhaka recently for police stationed all over the country, to celebrate their successful performance in holding a parliamentary election of ‘international standards’. 

Although the Election Commission (EC) did not claim the polls to be ‘international standard’, they arranged a ‘pitha’ festival for having held a ‘successful’ election.

The commission arranged the festival amid tight security at a time when the opposition parties planned to submit an official complaint to the commission, rejecting the 30 December poll results and demanding fresh voting. 

Even the commission’s top bureaucrats were seen merrily fishing in the pool at the office complex.

When the representatives of the winning party went to the commission to thank the officials, the officials asked for some privileges to the new government. It is not clear if these can be called their demands or favours.

We all are mesmerised by the dream of being global role models in all sectors. So it is not surprising that the election is being termed as one of ‘international standards’.

The international community undoubtedly was surprised to see such a one-sided election.

If the election had not stirred up debate and discussion globally, then the commission's performance wouldn't have been raised.

Two other election commissions - the Aziz commission and the Rakib commission- earlier drew the attention of international community.

Aziz Commission’s ‘success’ was to make a list of 10 million fake voters, which resulted in foreigners coming to Bangladesh and providing funds ,technology and recommendations for a good voters' list and election system. Similarly, the ‘success’ of the controversial Rakib Commission was to hold an election without any contest. That also drew the attention of the international community.

If the Rakib commission had avoided holding uncontested elections, would it have created international community’s headlines?

The Abu Hena Commission, Sayed Commission or Shamsul Huda Commission did not create such controversies!

The Nurul Huda commission has gifted us with an exceptional election. Everyone is well aware how this election is unique. The list of factors contributing to its uniqueness will not fit into a mere newspaper article.

The BNP-led alliances and Jatiya Oikya Front is compiling details of the irregularities and vote rigging across the country. We may have to wait a little longer for this to be revealed. On the other hand, the left alliances have highlighted their candidates’ experiences in a public hearing on Friday.

Veteran communist leader Azizur Rahman spoke about the attacks on his street rallies in his constituency during the election. He revealed that the AL-led mahajote (grand alliance) candidate announced taking over control of polling centres by deploying at least 300 activists armed with sticks.

Rajshahi candidate Alfaz Hossain recalled his experience of coming back after being kidnapped, for which he was forced to appoint an Awami League man as his polling agent.

A candidate in Gaibandha has described the scene of how the election officers feasted, slaughtering cows at the polling booths. When he went to lodge a complaint to the returning officer, the officer sent him to police. And the experience with the police was not pleasant.

The experiences were almost same in all regions of the country.

The left alliance will certainly not act as saviours of BNP. But the left candidates disclosed many incidents of oppression against Oikya Front candidates as well at the hearing.

The alliance said, the election commission will be remembered for celebrate the so-called ‘success’ of holding the election, by their pitha festival and caching fish in the office pool.

There might well be cause for the ruling party to be euphoric over defeating the opposition once again, but the EC’s drama does not end just there. There is dissent among the election commissioners. Election commissioner Mahbub Talukder, earlier, dismissed the claim of holding a free and fair election.

He thanked all the election officers for carrying out their duties to conduct a participatory election in an event on 3 January. Following the speech, later on 8 January, he issued a statement saying, he called it a participatory election since all the existing parties contested in the polls.

However, participatory election does not necessarily mean a fair one, he further explained. 

He also said in the statement that he did not make any comment on the credibility of the election. If everyone of the commission agreed on the credibility of the election as acceptable, free and fair, why did Mahbub Talukder come up with a different statement?

Mahbub Talukder called the election participatory due to the participation of all political parties. But political parties are only one component of the election. The real participants of the elections are the general people or the voters. Do the images of the voting day published in foreign media indicate a fair election at all?

It was the 70th anniversary of the universal declaration of human rights charter last year. According to the Article 21 of the declaration, the will of the people shall be the basis of the government’s authority. This will be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Do the statements of UN spokesman and the UN Human Rights Commission anyhow recognise the 11th parliamentary election as of international standards?

This election will be significant globally for another reason. That is the ethics of the chief election commissioner. According to the constitution, the status of the CEC is equivalent to the Supreme Court judges.

Can you imagine a judge ever conducting the trial of his nephew? This is virtually what has happened in the case of CEC.

If he could not stop his relatives from competing in the polls, he could go on vacations, as the Supreme Court judges do. In the constituency where his nephew was contesting, the opposition candidate could neither campaign, nor appoint any polling agent. On the contrary, he was injured and forced to leave the electoral grounds.

The EC removed a returning officer as the officer's relative was a candidate in the election in Gaibandha. However, the CEC failed to practice such ethics in his own case.

Former election commissioner M Sakhawat Hossain wrote that no ruling party got so many seats in the multi-party elections in the past except in 1973. On the other hand, 1, 855 candidates candidates lost their security deposits.

One of the opposition candidates did not get a single vote in his seat. The national turnout is 80 per cent whereas the EVM voting rates is only 51 per cent. Why the difference? Sakhawat Hossain asked the commission to find answers to these questions.

Unfortunately, the EC does not seem to have the least interest in these matters and that is quite normal. We as a nation cannot accept failure.

When the election commission itself is assisting the ruling party in their favour, there is no question of accepting failure. But the big concern is that instead of restoring the election commission’s accountability and reliability, the forward quarters of our society are either praising the unbelievable ability of the ruling party or speculating the future of BNP as a party.

*Kamal Ahmed is a journalist. This piece originally published in Prothom Alo print edition has been rewritten in English by Farjana Liakat