—Mustafa Kamal—

In terms of constitutional dynamism at home and international acceptability, no alternative to an elected government has yet been discovered anywhere in the world—and there is no sign of one emerging. Likewise, despite flaws, deviations, and dissatisfaction, no alternative to democracy has been found either. The main alternatives often cited to democracy are dictatorship, monarchy, oligarchy (rule by a few), and one-party systems.

In the modern context, election-based democracy is the most tested and widely accepted system, one in which ordinary people participate extensively. In developing countries, turbulence within electoral systems is not unusual. Various forms of instability, unrest, and anarchy are often fueled by certain quarters expending their full strength. As a result, conducting a free and fair national election in developing countries is extremely challenging.

Bangladesh, too, faces this challenge as it moves toward its thirteenth national election. Even so, there is an eager anticipation of a new dawn after a long era of kleptocracy and plunder. People are restless to vote; many have forgotten when they last truly cast a vote.

The government is also committed to presenting the nation with a historic election, and preparations are underway accordingly. Election-oriented political parties and citizens eager to exercise their voting rights await the day when, after the vote, power will be handed over to an elected government and the interim government will depart. The business community, too, is enduring many hardships in silence, waiting for an elected government and a dynamic, stable system of governance.

Amid all this, people are waiting—pondering how historic, unquestioned, free, and fair the election can truly be.

After independence, elections from 1973 to 1988 were marred by various flaws, irregularities, and forceful takeovers. Even in 1991, despite the goodwill of the then interim government head, Chief Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed, there were doubts and apprehensions about a fair election. The then Chief Election Commissioner, Justice Rauf, was also anxious. Ultimately, 1991 set a benchmark in Bangladesh’s history for free and participatory elections. The behind-the-scenes role of the army in that election remained largely unspoken. Recently, however, the army chief of that time, General Nuruddin Khan, has spoken a little about it. He said that Justice Shahabuddin once told him that a wonderful election had to be arranged—not through military rule, not under military supervision, and not under military leadership. Nuruddin Khan understood what he needed to do. By coordinating the army with everyone from the police to the Ansar forces, he created a kind of “magical” arrangement that elevated the election to a historic standard.

That legacy carried some influence through the elections of 1996, 2001, and even 2008. From 2014 onward, however, elections deteriorated—becoming spectacles of farce and mockery in 2018 and, most recently, in 2024. The consequences led to an inevitable new context in the country: the fall and flight of fascist forces that had devastated the electoral system. Now it is the turn of the interim government to organize a historic election. The Chief Election Commissioner’s final wish in life is to create such a history.

Over the past 53–54 years, many voting models have been displayed in Bangladesh, along with countless twists and turns of democracy: one-party, two-party, multi-party systems, and more. Elections and voting themselves have taken many forms and names—free elections, neutral elections, fair elections, participatory elections. Votes, too, have had many labels: vote coups, media coups, ballot-box snatching votes, yes-no votes. There have been subtle and crude forms of rigging, votes without ballots, nighttime voting, and so on.

Which model lies ahead now remains to be seen. In the very first election of independent Bangladesh in 1973, people witnessed a shocking model: ballot-box looting and the declaration of victory for almost all candidates of one party. This model dealt a severe blow to the image of Bangabandhu, who had struggled his entire life for voting rights. The widely discussed and criticized incident of bringing ballot boxes from Comilla to Dhaka to ensure the victory of favored Khondaker Moshtaque (later known as “killer Moshtaque”) is well known. Later came the yes-no vote during President Ziaur Rahman’s time, and various seat-distribution models under the Awami League. New “innovations” followed during General Ershad’s era.

The first real exception to this series of electoral “model shows” came after Ershad’s fall, in 1991 under Justice Shahabuddin’s caretaker government, when people tasted a truly free election for the first time. Subsequently, during the caretaker governments of Justices Habibur Rahman and Latifur Rahman, and later Fakhruddin Ahmed, a reasonably acceptable model continued. Then electoral sabotage began again. By 2018, allegations arose that daytime votes were completed at night.

Before that, in 2014, a record was set when 154 candidates were declared elected without a vote. In 2018, daytime voting allegedly took place at night, and by 2024, the so-called “I-dummy” model was added. Former CEC Nurul Huda had guaranteed that daytime votes would no longer be conducted at night. His predecessor had promised not to allow another 154 MPs to be elected without votes, as in 2014—and he kept that promise, reducing the number of MPs elected without votes, though he advanced the voting to nighttime instead. It was hoped that in 2024, the then CEC would break the record of night voting and ensure voting during the day. Reality turned out differently. Kazi Habibul Awal did not conduct daytime voting at night, nor did he declare 154 MPs elected without votes. Instead, he presented the “I-dummy circus.”

Those responsible for tarnishing elections in 2014, 2018, and 2024 still remain within both the civil and police administrations and retain the capacity to create serious distortions. Does that mean expecting a fair election is unjustified? No, not at all. Despite their overwhelming power, students and the public have driven them out.

In this effort, the Bangladesh Army has acted as a patriotic ally. On this issue, the army has ceased to be merely an army—it has become part of the people, remaining close to them in the field. It is not exercising magisterial authority or issuing threats; rather, it is assisting law-enforcement agencies.

In this context, last Monday, interim government Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus reiterated his call for the armed forces to remain neutral while performing their duties in the upcoming thirteenth national parliamentary election and referendum. He made this appeal at a meeting with senior officers of the army, navy, and air force at army headquarters. At the outset, he highlighted the armed forces’ proud and responsible role in times of national crisis and necessity and expressed gratitude for their patience and professionalism in maintaining law and order and public security. The meeting included detailed discussions on important and contemporary election-related issues. The Chief Adviser provided guidance to ensure a participatory, fear-free, and fair election through professionalism, neutrality, and inter-institutional coordination. Given its importance, the meeting was a significant pre-election initiative.

A fair election cannot be delivered by the government, the Election Commission, the army, or the police alone. Public participation is essential. Political parties play the role of captains of the people, and much depends on their conduct. They are competitors—perhaps adversaries—but not enemies. Unfortunately, some of their recent verbal battles and narratives are spreading tension and fear. These visible factions have struggled together, sacrificed lives, and endured repression. Their duplicity in the electoral arena pains those who hope for a fascism-free country.

If they wish, they can reach an understanding to ensure elections are no longer complicated. There should never again be elections without votes, night voting, or “I-dummy” practices—surely none of them wants that. They can decide for themselves that the country must not return to pre-2024 conditions, that enforced disappearances and killings must not return. The grave responsibility of safeguarding lives, livelihoods, security, business, income, and social dignity lies with them. To give this arrangement constitutional form, a parliament is needed—and before that, an urgent, fair election.

Throughout this long circus of national and local elections, even school committees, teachers’ associations, market committees, hawkers’ unions, business clubs, drivers’ associations, and more have conducted elections in similar flawed ways—bringing not only humiliation but public condemnation upon those elected. This must not continue. Before the people, there is no better alternative to elections and democracy.

—————————————————————-

Author: Journalist and columnist; Deputy Head of News, Banglavision