Pakistan’s election is not comparable with that of Bangladesh

Awami League’s general secretary on 28 January this year informed us that India had stood staunchly by our side regarding the national election. We must admit that this was essential because certain opposition parties had joined hands with certain foreign powers to disrupt the election. India hadn’t been overtly vocal before the polls. They tried to imply that the election was an internal matter of Bangladesh, but they did not forget to point to the issue of regional stability.

After the 28 January meeting between Obaidul Quader and the Indian high commissioner in Dhaka Pranay Kumar Verma, it was ascertained that not only did India have an active role in Bangladesh’s elections, but that this was ‘essential’ too. According to the newspaper Desh Rupantar, Obaidul Quader had said that regional political and various bilateral issues had been discussed at the meeting. The minister had also said that there was much similarity between our politics and that of India. Our common goal was to tackle terrorism and militancy, and to uphold politics of development.

The same newspaper on 7 February stated that Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina had said that of all the elections that had taken place since 1975, this was the most free, impartial and fair. She made this remark at a meeting held to exchange views with Gopalganj Awami League leaders and activists. From her remark we can conclude that she felt that all the past elections in which Awami League had emerged victorious, were not as free or fair as this one. BNP may have various allegations regarding the elections of 2008 and 1996, but local and foreign observers declared these to be free and fair.

After 1975, Awami League contested in all but two national elections. Three elections were held under military rule and the rest were held after the revival of democracy by means of the mass upsurge in 1990. The two elections in which Awami League did not participate were in 1998 during General Ershad’s military rule and on 15 February 1996 when they were boycotting the polls in demand of a caretaker government. After the one-sided 15 February election and after BNP met the demand for a caretaker government, three elections were held in which Awami League won two and BNP won one. After that Awami League abolished the caretaker system and held three elections.

From the words of Chief Election Commissioner Kazi Habibul Awal, it is evident that he is not at all confident about the credibility of the 7 January election. Speaking to the media on 13 January he said, “I say with no hesitation that if the election had been more inclusive, the voter turnout would certainly have been higher.” He said that if the larger political parties did not take part in the election, the election would not be unacceptable or unlawful, but its inclusivity, acceptability and validity may be curbed. Its legality may not be questioned, but the link between legality and legitimacy cannot be altogether dismissed.

The chief election commissioner did not stop there. He praised the election in Pakistan. He said that there had been outstanding participation in the Pakistan election. He may actually be thanked for, in effect, admitting that the election which he conducted had a lack of validity and acceptance. However, at the same time it must be repeated that he cannot shrug off the liability of failure.

It is not just Chief Election Commissioner Kazi Habibul Awal who made the comparison with the Pakistan election. Many political analysts drew up a comparison. They see the founder of Pakistan’s PTI, former prime minister Imran Khan, nothing less than a hero. Standing up against the US and the military, amid all sorts of trials and tribulations, he kept his party in the election fray. While his followers were unable to contest as part of the party, they displayed sensational success, contesting as independent candidates.

These analysts say that BNP should have participated in the election at any cost and then BNP too would have seen success like Imran Khan’s PTI. The problem with such simplistic thinking is that they forget that there had been an election on 30 December 2018 in which BNP contested despite the arrests, enforced disappearances, cases and attacks. In other words, what PTI did in 2024, BNP tried the same five years ago. Their experience was starkly different. The voters did not get the chance to go to the polling centres in 2018. The votes were cast on the night before. Even at that time there had been pressure from foreign powers the election to be free and fair.

The strategies which the government and ruling party applied this time have all more or less been revealed in the media. Possible BNP candidates, and even the second and third alternative leaders, were arrested in false cases or on suspicion of subversive activities and also old cases against them were revived. The arrested leaders were not even given chance for the hearing of their bail appeals. Even a month after the elections, the top leaders have not been granted bail. On the contrary, they are being shown arrested in new cases. And a new propensity is to show several cases lodged at several different police cases in the same incident. There may be debate over the party’s claim that 20,000 of their leaders and activists are under arrest, but there is no denying the mass detentions that have been taken place.

In Pakistan, the huge power and influence of the military behind the scenes is blamed for the political unrest and the socioeconomic predicament of the country. Even the non-partisan caretaker government system that they initiated for the elections, is not free of the influence of the armed forces. It was because no one obstructed the voters from spontaneously participating in the election that Imran Khan’s PTI could create such a sensation. There is no doubt that Pakistan is gradually lagging behind us. After the remarks made by the chief election commissioner, would it be very wrong if anyone said they have a lot to learn from us in controlling the direction and results of the election?

* Kamal Ahmed is a senior journalist

* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir