In the recent past the nation had to bear with a comically stubborn chief election commissioner who, before he left office to enjoy an enforced leave, caused large scale protests and demonstrations resulting in loss of life and property. It was indeed a tragic scenario wherein the referee was strongly disowned by a significant portion of the players, but the former was perilously holding on to his position in an unbecoming manner. It no longer appeared that the chief election commissioner was the skipper of a constitutional body in which the nation reposed its trust.

His was a beleaguered existence, flanked by not-so-stern looking sentinels, often enlivened by the on-again off-again encounter with the gentlemen and women of the fourth estate. It was quite hilarious to learn about his legal acumen and quoting of poems to illustrate his total commitment to the job. The tragedy was that an unenlightened audience could not take any cognizance of that. The CEC, on leave, will, hopefully, have plenty of time to pontificate once he returns to his exalted chair upon expiration of the enforced leave. The nation wishes him good days and nights during the interlude.

The Election Commission, in the recent past, was abuzz with activity for quite sometime, though not always of the desirable manner. Journalists of both the print and the electronic media were regular visitors to the commission office and, interestingly enough, the very wise and erudite gentlemen firmly entrenched in their constitutionally exalted positions were enjoying the company of the media men and women, particularly those of the electronic variety.

Very lively interviews were given by the learned commissioners holding diametrically opposite views on issues of national importance like the preparation of fresh voters list, or the updating of the same. The dispute or divergence of opinions, relating to the modality of preparing the voters list reached the precincts of the apex court, and directions were given to the commission. However, the directives caused further controversy, as one of the learned commissioners, now the acting CEC, according to newspaper reports, questioned the propriety of the jurisdiction of the court in the matter of preparation of the voters list.

The temporarily indisposed chief election commissioner came back to his onerous charge, and the Election Commission preferred an appeal against the order of the High Court Division on the subject of preparation of voters list. All in all, there was a near "Hitchcockian" dimension to the unfolding voter's list drama.

The Election Commission, as of now, without doubt appears to be a confused house. This is unfortunate at a time when the worries of the concerned citizens of Bangladesh are about the peaceful and fair holding of next general election. Their fears assume heightened significance, as major opposition political parties have demanded basic reforms of the Election Commission and the caretaker government.

There is no denying that on major issues the principal political parties are virtually at loggerheads. In such an environment a constitutional body like the Election Commission is expected to be circumspect and discreet enough to draw the respect and admiration of the citizens so that the lurking doubts about the impartial holding of the next general election are dispelled. The prevailing scenario, however, does not generate much optimism because we are already in an imbroglio over the modality of preparing/updating the voters list. The resolution of this dispute through the apex court may bring some relief, but the complaints and controversies that have arisen already in this connection are not amenable to an easy solution.

Complaints like the registration of 64 lakh false voters during the Awami League tenure, as alleged by a BNP stalwart, or Awami League's suspicion that its sympathizers, including a large portion of the minorities, have not been registered at all during the process of making new voters list definitely deserve uppermost consideration. Such complaints are accorded prominence because there are additional allegations that the new voters list has been prepared with the active support and connivance of ruling party workers, and its student and youth fronts. These complaints are surfacing in the wake of newspaper reports that more than 150 known BNP supporters have been appointed in the Election Commission, and that they have taken extra interest in the preparation of the new voters list.

The disappointing part of the election-related process is that we are not cognizant of the actual bottlenecks in the way of fair election, and that there is inaction in undertaking those administrative steps that will facilitate the fair and smooth conduction of election. For example, if recent experience is any guide, one may say with some certitude that the malpractice of false or bogus voting will assume worrying proportions in the next election which will be contested by two desperate political parties.

It would be relevant to recount that we do not have, as yet, a central registration of the population, and the consequent provision of identity card for each voter. This is the ground reality, although we all know that impersonation and related malpractices seriously mar the credibility of our elections. In India there is provision of ID card for each voter, and the electronic voting system is nearly complete, but we are still sitting over the voter ID project. The members of the public have a right to know the details in this respect because the constitutional body charged with the onerous duty of holding a credible election cannot perform its function satisfactorily without adequate administrative preparation. One would like to hear from the wise men at the Election Commission.

The appointment of 150 election officers, mostly allegedly partisan student and youth leaders belonging to the immediate past ruling party, is another problematic dimension that might lead to serious altercation resulting in violence. The fact that the Public Service Commission has appointed those persons will not mitigate the problem, because ground reality and popular perception about the impartiality of public appointments do not appear to be reassuring. Against this background, the cancellation of such appointments as demanded by some parties will worsen the prospect of fair and peaceful election. Concerned citizens would like to be apprised of the Election Commission's policies and strategies on such a thorny issue.

In a democratic state, the electoral process exercises determining power over those who hold political office. It is the electorate which confers the power to govern, and calls the government to account. If the electorate is to enjoy true equality in constitutional participation it is of fundamental constitutional importance that the electoral system ensures four principles:

(a) That there be full franchise, subject to limited restrictions;

(b) That the value of each vote cast is equal to that of every other votes;

(c) That the conduct of election campaigns be regulated to ensure legality and fairness;

(d) That the voting system be such as to produce both, a legislative body representative of the electorate and a government with sufficient democratic support to be able to govern effectively.

It is against the above four principal objectives that the law must be evaluated. However, it must be recognized that these elements are in large measure inseparable from each other. Each aspect of the electoral process combines with another to form a system.

Following the enforced leave of Justice Aziz under tumultuous circumstances the government has appointed two new election commissioners after, reportedly, much examination and scrutiny. The unsettling events that followed such appointments testify to the hollowness of the authority's sincerity about the proper holding of a national election. It is no secret that there is a distinct drill to be undergone before the government makes an appointment to a Constitutional post. Such an exercise invariably involves the vetting of the particulars of the prospective candidate by designated state agencies, in addition to recommended discussions with the concerned professionals and nationally acclaimed civil society leaders. That the same was not done, and that the concerned appointments were made in a slipshod manner, has been made abundantly clear, to the utter frustration of an expectant polity.

The palpable documentary evidence about the sheer unsuitability of a particular person with regard to appointment to a constitutional post highlights the tragic indifference of our guardians. So, if we are taken for a ride by an insensitive establishment, the day may not be far off when people might start showing their thumb to the occupiers of high offices. Understandably, that would not be a preferred sight.

The imbroglio at the Election Commission, at present, is indeed amusing. The captain has proceeded on leave because he is neither acceptable nor credible and, therefore, cannot be relied upon to oversee the principal job of holding the national election, but may be allowed to return to his chair to do other acts. A just appointed election commissioner has been asked to proceed on leave and he has, reportedly, agreed. Another veteran commissioner is reportedly willing to proceed on leave but cannot do so because of unexplained reasons. Nobody knows for sure how far we should venture to insult public sensitivity and waste public money.

The author is a former Secretary & IGP.