The Election Commission has revealed the full list of the candidates for the 11th parliamentary election scheduled to be held on December 30.
A total of 1,841 candidates -- 1,745 from political parties and 96 independent -- are vying for 300 parliamentary seats, according to the EC.
Here is the full list of the candidates:
The national election of December 30 has turned the life of Mofiz Uddin upside down -- and all for supporting BNP.
From a decent tea-shop vendor at Rabeya market of Bonkishore village in Rajshahi's Tanore upazila, the 48-year old man now works on a potato field.
“I have been a dedicated BNP worker since the 90s,” Mofiz said. “If I have committed a crime, it would be my engagement with BNP.”
In a tin-roofed earthen room under a Koroi tree at the market, Mofiz started the shop and ran it for over the last 20 years.
Furnished with a television, eight chairs, five tables, four benches and a few racks of bakery items, sweets and groceries, his tea-shop fetched him around Tk 3,000 a day to support his family of seven.
On December 21, Mofiz joined the election campaign for BNP candidate Aminul Haq when the latter went to Pachondor union.
Later that evening, a group of stick wielding men went to the market and ransacked the outside of his tea-shop, according to eye-witnesses.
“The attackers were outsiders, not known to me,” said a local businessman.
“I heard about the attack on my shop when I reached home, after campaigning that day,” said Mofiz. A friend of his called him from the market and told him to hide as the attackers were looking for him.
Until polls day, local AL men used the tea-shop as the election office of Awami League candidate Omor Faruk Chowdhury.
“Two days after the election ended, some local AL workers damaged what was left of the shop, including the earthen room, tin-roof, furniture, television, and everything else inside.”
Locals told this correspondent that they heard the AL men would build a party office in that place.
When contacted, Reaz Uddin, president of AL unit at Pachondor ward-2, said, “We are yet to decide on building our office there. If not an office, we may construct a passengers' shed that will come to the use of many.”
He said the land was 'khas' and Mofiz had been illegally occupying it.
On the identity of the attackers, he said, “Nobody knows them. They were wearing helmets and came to the village on motorcycles.”
He denied that it was local AL men who had damaged the shop after the election.
“It was Mofiz's brother, nephew and son who damaged the shop,” he said. On why Mofiz's own relatives would damage the shop, Reaz did not have an explanation.
When contacted, Rajshahi Superintendent of Police Md Shahidullah said they had not heard about the incident.
“We will investigate all allegations of post-election violence,” said the SP, adding that police circulated a message in the district so that no one would spread fear among others over feuds during the election.
Upon losing his source of income, Mofiz began work as day labourer on the potato fields to make ends meet, earning a mere Tk 300 a day.
“I am living in fear. I could not even go see the condition of my shop, the one I so dearly built from scratch,” he said.
The Election Commission is yet to begin delimitation of parliamentary constituencies, a vital job ahead of the next national election, due to the unavailability of the final report on the latest census.
Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies is currently conducting the post-enumeration check of the census, said Matiar Rahman, director general of Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS).
Demarcation of parliamentary seats, a complicated and technical job which sometimes creates controversy, takes a good amount of time, said EC officials.
In the process, some constituencies become larger and some other become smaller. This means some MP candidates in the next parliamentary election will have to woo new voters in their constituencies while some others would lose voters in their strongholds.
According to EC officials, the commission might need to bring significant changes in the delimitation of parliamentary seats this year as the demarcation will be done after the Population and Housing Census 2022.
The EC's work plan for the 12th parliamentary polls, announced in mid-September last year, set a target of preparing a new policy to demarcate constituencies by reviewing the previous policy by January, and complete delimitation by May.
The commission sent a letter to the BBS over one and a half months back seeking the final census report. But it received the preliminary census report from the BBS.
"We are waiting for the final census report for starting delimitation of parliamentary constituencies. We want to complete the process by May," Election Commissioner Md Alamgir told The Daily Star.
He said the EC would follow its work plan for the 12th national election, likely to be held late December this year or early January next year.
"We will wait for a certain period for the final census report. If we do not get it, we will go ahead with delimitation using the old census data."
The BBS launched the preliminary census report in July last year.
Dilder Hossain, project director of the Population and Housing Census 2022, said they were expecting to have the post-enumeration check report from the BIDS soon.
According to the delimitation of constituencies law, boundaries of Jatiya Sangsad constituencies should be redrawn based on the distribution of population as given in the latest census report, keeping in mind intact administrative units and administrative convenience.
The commission will have to publish a preliminary list of redrawn constituencies and the voters will get the chance to file appeals against the EC's decision.
The EC would be able to finalise demarcation only after settling the objections.
According to the preliminary report of the 2022 census, the country's total population was about 16.52 crore, up from 14.40 crore in 2011 census. Population in Dhaka, Chattogram, Khulna and other cities saw a significant rise.
The latest census said there were 59.79 lakh people in Dhaka north city and 43 lakh in Dhaka south city. There were 69.70 lakh people in undivided Dhaka in 2011.
The latest report says that population of 63 districts increased, but it came down in Jhalakathi in comparison with the data of the 2011 census.
EC officials said this year they might need to redraw more constituencies than in 2018 when the delimitation was done ahead of 11th parliamentary polls.
The then KM Nurul Huda-lead commission brought changes to boundaries of 25 constituencies in 2018. The ATM Shamsul Huda-led commission brought massive changes to 133 constituencies in 2008. That was the first demarcation of constituencies after the 2001 census.
The then commission, headed by Kazi Rakibuddin Ahmad, redrew the boundaries of 87 constituencies in 2013 ahead of the 10th parliamentary elections. That was also the first demarcation after the 2011 census.
Election expert Abdul Alim said the EC should follow the international guiding principles for redrawing constituencies. The areas should be as equal as possible. The variation in the number of voters between constituencies should be plus or minus 5 percent, he added.
"We see that one constituency has more than seven lakh voters and another has only about two lakh."
If voters and other stakeholders suspect that the electoral boundaries have been drawn unfairly, it affects the credibility of the entire electoral process, he told The Daily Star.
"Hence, electoral boundaries must be drawn in a manner that promotes credible and fair elections," added Alim who worked on behalf of United Nations with the ATM Shamsul Huda-led EC.
Bangladesh is once again at a crossroads. The country needs the upcoming parliamentary election to be a free, well-participated election to restore its credentials. It is time to choose our representatives again and to transfer not power, but responsibility, to them peacefully so that we can return to the task of self-governance. Are we ready for the task?
At the mature age of 52 and with no stable system of electoral governance and transfer of power in sight, Bangladesh is reeling under internal turmoil, external pressures, and an irresponsible and immature political leadership.
Our politics has been traumatic. After the return to democracy in 1991, our political journey towards parliamentary democracy over the past 32 years demonstrates behavioural patterns in ruling and opposing parties that have mired the possibilities of healthy politics for a culture of a "sane" society that could have been a green ground to grow and nurture democracy. Instead, it has been ruthlessly trampled upon, turning into a waste land where nothing but hatred can grow. Today, on the eve of our 12th parliamentary election, we witness an ongoing battle for the highest seat of governance where all decisions are made, with the parties convinced that if you cannot keep your grip on your streets, you are unseated!
Based on these political premises, the streets are more important than the parliament, the kingsmen are more important than the judiciary, an army of sycophants and loyalists are far more important than voters!
So why should a political party elected to power build democratic institutions? It does not support the "street ideology." And why should a political party in opposition not do everything to obstruct the smooth functioning of parliament? Well, it does not comply with the "street dictum." They all choose the streets to be their seat of governance. Hence all political parties, big or small, have the same political ideology. And if you cannot join or support the skirmishing sides, it does not matter for whom you vote; you may not reach the polling booth, but some kind individual may make sure that you are not "disenfranchised." Isn't that nice? The system works. No one is left behind. Just like it happened in 2018.
There is no doubt that to win an election, we need to have "street wisdom," an endless flow of money, and an army of loyalists.
No one can beat the ruling party when it comes to street wisdom. With decades of experience, they are the maestro of street agitations – they have won many battles on the streets. The endless flow of money is no problem. The parliament is now at the centre of our business world and in the hands of our business tycoons. Free market policy allows them free access to our reserves. The problem of money has been solved.
As for the growing loyalists, opposition parties provide an additional force. They break into splinter groups headed by "tribal chieftains" who are satisfied with a few crumbs from the pie. They form the much needed "trusted" opposition. That, too, is done.
And in all this, where does the Election Commission (EC) stand? With the Administration and Home still beyond its control and an RPO that reduces its powers, and an unrelenting political grip over its functioning, the EC is in a state of limbo – dangling in thin air, watching from above as the street fights continue.
The street fights will take lives, as they have done in the past. It will hurt vulnerable voters and "those who do not belong." Fear of losing power and a backlash, and the existential fear of not getting to power, are tearing the political parties apart. All sides have to work to reduce fear in the others. The prognosis is the "coming of a new tragedy."
But it need not be so if they leave the streets – if the parties come to the table to talk and concede on an all-party approach, as they did in 1991 and again in 2008. We, the tired people of Bangladesh, are waiting for our political parties to put behind an era of hatred and violence, and embrace compassion and forgiveness, so that this nation can move forward free from the prison of the past.
Sharmeen S Murshid is an election analyst and chief executive officer of Brotee, a civil society organisation.
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.
Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.
The High Court (HC) today rejected a writ petition that challenged the legality of oath taking by lawmakers elected in the December 30 general election.
The court came up with the order saying that there is nothing illegal in taking oath taken by the lawmakers as they took charges of their offices on January 30.
The HC bench of Justice Sheikh Hassan Arif and Justice Razik-Al-Jalil passed the order.
Earlier on February 6, the court concluded hearing on the petition and fixed today (February 18) for passing an order.
On that day, AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon argued that oath taking by the lawmakers on January 3 was unconstitutional as the tenure of the 10th parliament expired on January 28.
“Therefore, there were two parliaments from January 3 to January 28 -- which is unconstitutional,” he told the court on February 6.
Attorney General MahbubeyAlamhad argued that as new lawmakers took charge on January 30, oath taking was not illegal.
Most national elections, wherever they are held, occupy that country's attention for a maximum of a few months – in some cases, even a few weeks. But for us, it is a multi-year obsession. We started talking about our national election from last year. Now it occupies the centre stage of talks even with some of our most important international partners, namely the United States and European Union; the latter's pre-election assessment mission is already in town, whose findings will significantly impact Western views on the upcoming polls.
With so much attention, one would think that our election must be among the best in the world. Sadly, it is among the most questioned. Even Erdogan's election, who ruled Turkiye as prime minister and president with an iron hand for over 20 years, was not subjected to such scrutiny as ours is and will be. Even the run-off went smoothly with razor-thin margins the first time around. The opposition never accused the all-powerful president of rigging. The reason is simple: everybody – be it the ruling or the opposition party – trusts the process. Our case is the exact opposite.
Even though there are endless talks about the election, there is hardly ever any sensible discussion on it. What we have is regular public utterances of the major political parties, which are mostly acrimonious, defamatory and setting preconditions, but never aimed at narrowing the distance among them. Even after 52 years of independence and 32 years of restoration of democracy – and after all the talks, experiments, debates, international negotiations (there was also an attempt by former US President Jimmy Carter some years back), efforts by the Commonwealth and UN – we still don't have an agreed formula on how to hold a free and fair election.
At the moment, a section of the international community, led by the US, is pressing us to hold a free and fair election. The ruling party interprets this simple and natural demand as a hidden attempt to remove them from power. The opposition hopes that it is a formula that will place them in power. Nobody wants to know, or even asks, what the citizens want.
As taxpayers and law-abiding citizens, we want our freedoms, rights, and good governance. They can only be realised if democracy exists. Democracy, simplistically put, can only flourish if genuine representatives of the people are elected, and that can only happen if elections are free, fair and without violence and money play. We come full circle and end with the focus on free and fair elections.
Journalistically put, our development curve has been moving upwards while our democracy curve has followed an opposite trajectory. The reality today is that our advancement in the economic field is being overshadowed by our setbacks in freedoms, rights, and institutions of accountability. This fact, our government and its leadership do not seem to fully understand. The question it should be asking itself is that after so much development, especially in infrastructure and energy, why widespread dissatisfaction should still exist. The denial of this fact is what has isolated the ruling party from the masses, leading it to suspect that a demand for free and fair elections is aimed at a change of guard at the highest level. With such a record of economic success, it is the Awami League who should confidently move towards an acceptable election and not make questionable laws that further fuel suspicion as to their intentions.
The government move that really launched the downward trend in our democracy, especially the nature and quality of our representative government, is the abolition by the parliament, on June 30, 2011, of the caretaker government system for holding elections. It was done on the basis of a "short order" of a few lines by the Appellate Division, presided over by the then Chief Justice ABM Khairul Haque, delivered on May 10, 2011. Interestingly, the short order also suggested that the system be allowed to continue for one or two more terms. However, the government, without considering that option and without waiting for the full text of the verdict, threw out the caretaker government provision from our constitution. One may recall that it was done by the same party that instituted it after years of mass agitation, economy-crippling hartals, and resignation from parliament following endless walkouts. The way the two subsequent elections – in 2014 and 2018 – were conducted clearly revealed why the ruling party abolished the caretaker government system.
If an election is ultimately the expression of the "public will," measures must be taken so that it can be expressed without fear, especially of repercussions. The institution that is at the centre of the whole process, the EC, must be given full authority and freedom to act, as specified by the constitution. Curtailing its power, that also in the name of democracy, and with the 2014 and 2018 elections still fresh in our memory, really does not cut much ice. A repressive legal structure cannot be expected to deliver a free public will. There have been several promises of amending laws such as the Digital Security Act (DSA) and others, and also restraining law enforcement members from inappropriately using their powers. There is no evidence of that happening yet.
As the world is now looking at us to see how we are preparing for the upcoming national polls, our government has just passed a law that clearly reduces the Election Commission's independence in conducting elections. The amendment bars the EC from cancelling election results and allows it to withhold polling only at specific centres where irregularities occur. The law minister said the EC shouldn't have such powers, it is anti-democratic. But shouldn't the EC have the power to make up its own mind? What happens if violence occurs in the majority of the polling centres in a constituency? Shouldn't the EC suspend the election in the entire constituency even then? The amendment has been kept vague on this point. This will ultimately result in restraining the EC. Experience shows that when a law is vague, the authorities usually shy away from stern action, especially if the candidate is from the incumbent side of the political divide.
The other crucial amendment is shortening the time period during which the EC can act. Previously, it was from the date of the announcement of the election schedule till the official publication of the results, which usually covered a period of 40-plus days. Now, the EC's option is to act only on the "polling day." Even if the EC concludes that sufficient ground exists to apprehend that violence may take place on the election day, it still cannot suspend the election till the very day. It could, before the amendment.
If we really believe in the EC's independence, why tie its hands in this manner?
If an election is ultimately the expression of the "public will," measures must be taken so that it can be expressed without fear, especially of repercussions. The institution that is at the centre of the whole process, the EC, must be given full authority and freedom to act, as specified by the constitution. Curtailing its power, that also in the name of democracy, and with the 2014 and 2018 elections still fresh in our memory, really does not cut much ice. A repressive legal structure cannot be expected to deliver a free public will. There have been several promises of amending laws such as the Digital Security Act (DSA) and others, and also restraining law enforcement members from inappropriately using their powers. There is no evidence of that happening yet.
If politics is the art of compromise, we seem never to have heard of it. If elections are the mechanism of peaceful transfer of power, we never want to practise it. And if democracy is the system where all political parties have a level playing field, we just don't want to play that game.
Can we solve in the next few months what we have been unable to in the last three decades? If we fail, what prospect does it hold for our future?
Mahfuz Anam is the editor and publisher of The Daily Star.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. 
Leave your comments