Election, democracy and Bangladesh’s future

“The ruling party’s insistence on elections under the 15th amendment, without dissolving the current parliament, has left the opposition with no real choice but to either participate under conditions heavily skewed against them or face political erasure. This decision not only contravenes the spirit of democracy but also risks pushing Bangladesh toward a precarious future, as millions of Bangladeshis find themselves deprived of the right to freely elect their government.”

THE ruling party is determined to hold the elections to the 11th parliament under the 15th amendment and also without dissolving the 10th parliament notwithstanding the consensus outside its circles that with both intact, there cannot be free, fair, participatory and inclusive national elections. The National Unity Front that includes the Bangladesh Nationalist Party that was formed recently also stated unequivocally that without the amendment to the 15th amendment to allow a neutral, non-party government in place of elections under the ruling party and dissolution of the 10th parliament, it would be unrealistic to expect the next elections to be any different than the January 2014 elections through which the overwhelming majority of Bangladeshis lost their right to vote and elect the government of their choice.

The reasons why the 15th amendment must be amended and the 10th parliament dissolved for holding free and fair national elections are clear as crystal. Ironically, the argument that national elections cannot be free and fair when held under the government/party in power was made in the country’s politics not by the BNP but by the Awami League that it now appears to have forgotten. It had imposed with Jamaat-e-Islami and the Jatiya Party as allies over 140 days of general strike in the country accompanied by violence and destruction of property and loss of lives to force the BNP that was in power in that period (1991–96) to abandon the 1972 constitution adopted while Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was in office that allowed the party in power to conduct the elections and adopt the neutral caretaker system as the election-time government.
The BNP opposed the move for the caretaker government at first and held the elections to the 6th parliament in February 1996 under the 1972 constitution. The outcome of that elections was unsatisfactory. There was no contest in 48 of the 300 seats and the voter turn-out over all was low. The BNP realised that the elections had left the government short on legitimacy. It, therefore, accepted the AL/Jamaat/JP’s demand and amended the 1972 constitution through the 13th amendment and adopted the caretaker government as the election-time government. In the first elections held under the caretaker government in June 1996, the Awami League won and the BNP became the official opposition.

Two more national elections were held under the caretaker government. Both were free and fair in the opinions of national and international election observers. In fact, the Awami League won the last elections under the caretaker government in December 2008 with a three-fourth majority. Nevertheless, it reverted to the 1972 constitution for the election-time government through the 15th amendment that it adopted in 2011. The Awami League not only reverted to the old system of elections under party government, through the 15th amendment, it gave enhanced powers to the prime minister during the elections that even Sheikh Mujib did not have when he was prime minister. And, to turn its own argument that it had made in 1996 that elections under party government cannot be free or fair to force the BNP to adopt the caretaker government in 1996 on its head, the Awami League allowed the outgoing parliament to continue till the new parliament was sworn in to office that meant that a large number of the members of the parliament of the ruling party would be allowed to contest with all their powers and privileges including influence over the civil administration and the law enforcement agencies intact in the national elections to elect a new parliament!

There were other issues in the 15th amendment that raised serious questions about the ruling party’s intentions about national elections. It did not seek a mandate for annulling the caretaker government from the people. In fact, there was no mention about it in its election manifesto for the 2008 elections that it had won handsomely. Chief justice Khairul Huq who wrote the Supreme Court verdict that expedited the annulment of the caretaker government by the parliament had recommended that at least two more elections should be held under it before it was scratched for good. Notwithstanding all of the above, the prime minister took the committee that was established to consider the Supreme Court’s verdict by surprise when she announced in the committee meeting the annulment of the caretaker government with immediate effect. Even, the late parliamentarian Suranjit Sengupta, the chairman of the said committee was unaware that the prime minister would make that announcement. It was true that there were some problems in the caretaker system but that was because it was abused by the political parties. The BNP, for instance, did not do the system any good when it tried to add a huge number of false voters for the 2006 national elections when it was in power in 2001–2006.

The caretaker government system nevertheless was the best way to hold elections with any degree of freeness and fairness given the unbelievable animosity between the BNP and the Awami League. The mistake of annulling the caretaker government from the nation’s point of view and its benefit for the ruling party became palpably evident as the Awami League empowered and emboldened by new powers under the 15th amendment began to see the doors open to not just the chance to return to power for a second consecutive term but to do what it had tried and failed in 1972–75, namely, introducing in the country a one-party rule. The outcome of the January 2014 national elections was a nightmare for the country’s democratic hopes. In 153 seats, there was just one contestant that made the elections redundant and the most unconstitutional acts ever in the country’s history. The elections made a total mockery of the preamble to the Bangladesh constitution that reads: ‘We, the people of Bangladesh, having proclaimed our independence on the 26th day of March, 1971 and through a historic struggle for national liberation, established the independent, sovereign People’s Republic of Bangladesh.’ The voter turnout over all was in the single digit that in effect meant that the right of the people to vote was taken away from them.
Nevertheless, the 15th amendment alone would not have allowed the Awami League to return to power because the BNP and its allies had launched a strong movement with considerable support from the
people for elections under the caretaker government. A number of other factors had allowed the Awami League to hold the 2014 elections, taking full advantage of the 15th amendment. These factors were the Shahbag movement; the trial of the 1971 war criminals, the Hefazat uprising; the conclusion of the western powers that a vote for the BNP/Jamaat was a vote for so-called Islamic terrorism; and intervention of India to help the Awami League return to power for furthering its (Indian) interests. And the BNP made a number of serious mistakes that helped the Awami League hold the apology of elections and return to
power.

The absence of most of the factors that had helped the Awami League hold the controversial 2014 elections, particularly India’s decision not to interfere in the forthcoming elections together with the polariation of the opposition forces in demand for elections under a neutral government are positive developments for the country, looking ahead into the forthcoming elections. However, new signs are developing that hint that the elections may not be held peacefully. As stated at the beginning, the ruling party is insisting that the next elections would be held under the party in power with the 10th parliament intact underlining clearly that it has no intention to allow the opposition a level playing ground. In addition, it has also politicised the Election Commission in its favour together with institutions critical for free and fair elections, namely the law enforcement agencies and the civil administration. Even after all of these, the ruling party appears uncertain of returning to power and its leaders are stating that unless their party returns to power and, instead, power goes to the BNP, hundreds of thousands of their supporters would be killed. Certainly, this is not the sign of a party confident that it would again come to power peacefully.

The fear that the Awami League has been expressing may not be unfounded that suggests that they would not want to lose power under any circumstances. It is now no longer a secret that in free and fair elections, its chances are very bleak. Thus elections under a neutral, caretaker government with the dissolution of the 10th parliament have to be ruled out at this stage unless pressure on the Awami League from outside that it cannot deny is brought upon it. In 2014, the Awami League had said that it was holding the elections for constitutional reasons to stop the extra-constitutional forces from coming to power and fresh elections would be held like what had happened in 1996 when the BNP had given fresh elections because the earlier elections under the party government was farcical although the elections held by the BNP in February 1996 was far better than the elections held by the Awami League in 2014.

This time the Awami League wittingly or unwittingly has left the BNP and the opposition with no alternative, no hope. The opposition could go to the elections the AL way certain only to lose and, worse still, open the door to the Awami League to establish its 1971–75 dream of one-party government in the country. Meanwhile, two non-political groups, first, those who took to the streets on the quota issue, and, second, school children who carried out a movement on the issue of road safety both proved that the government’s law enforcement agencies are not powerful to withstand formidable challenges in the streets. And furthermore, the ruling party has found in the BNP a totally different opposition this time in comparison with 2013–2014. The ruling party taken Khaleda Zia to jail well ahead the elections expecting that the BNP would come out to the streets and give the law enforcement agencies enough time to annihilate them leaving them unable to do anything to stop a repetition of the 2014 elections. Meanwhile, Khaleda Zia’s incarceration is tilting the sympathy factor among the people that was at the time of the 2014 elections with the ruling party, in favour of the opposition.

Therefore, if there is no agreement between the ruling party and the opposition forces on the election-time government together with the dissolution of the 10th parliament, it would be unrealistic to expect elections through which the ruling party would come to power for a third consecutive term and the opposition and the country would accept it as business as usual. The stakes are too high, raised by the ruling party itself that is leaving the opposition no hope of survival if they allow it to come to power other than in free and fair elections. And with a million Rohingyas in Bangladesh and with international terrorism in a disarray in the Middle East and looking for new places to relocate, conflict and violence over the elections would be disastrous for the country’s future. And any violence in Bangladesh over the elections is something that
India is viewing with great concern which is why New Delhi has supported free, fair and inclusive elections. There is already news in the media that the ULFA terrorists are regrouping in Bangladesh.

The Awami League should look at its party’s history, particularly at the fact that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had united the people of Bangladesh as a monolith through the national elections of Pakistan on December 7, 1970. That unity raised him to the stature of one of the greatest leaders of our times. Therefore, it is in respect to him, and the fact that millions had laid down their lives answering to his call for an independent and democratic Bangladesh that the present Awami League should do whatever is necessary to hold free, fair and participatory national elections. It did not let the constitution

stop it in 1996 in demanding the caretaker government system. It should not let the constitution, this time an amendment to an amendment that it had adopted itself, stop it when it is clear as crystal that without an amendment to the 15th amendment to establish a neutral, election-time non-party government, there cannot free and fair elections. And the failure to hold the next elections without the participation of all the political parties where the people could vote freely and fairly, Bangladesh could go over the edge.

(This article was originally published in New Age)