Coming a year before the general election, and nearly a year after the formation of the incumbent Election Commission, it is natural that the six by-polls held Wednesday would be viewed against the wider political backdrop. It was, therefore, frustrating to know how little things have changed, despite the relative lack of violence, which would have been something to look out for under different circumstances. It's quite evident now that any changes, or promises of changes, made over the past year or so only cemented the status quo, which doesn't bode well for our electoral future.

Read more

Calling the by-polls 'free and fair' dims hope for 2024

If we're to pick a word to summarise the by-polls, it would be "absence" – absence of voters, absence of interest from the wider society, absence of strong safeguards against irregularities, absence of main opposition BNP, whose lawmakers' resignation from parliament had led to the by-polls. Voter turnout was poor in all the six constituencies. As per an estimate, only about 28 percent of voters showed up, in a trend that has been persistent throughout all local elections and by-polls held over the last few years. The predictable nature of election outcomes, and the lack of trust about the neutrality of responsible state departments, seem to have caused ennui and despair among the people.

Read more

Two by-polls, 29 years apart – yet so similar?

It seems almost futile to ask why the Election Commission is failing to address voter apathy despite repeated appeals from election observers. The EC, after the latest by-polls, again stuck to its "peaceful and well-organised" narrative, even though we have received reports of various election-related irregularities from a number of constituencies. The EC's failure to recognise that the mere appearance of elections is not enough is really alarming. We need fair and participatory elections. And we need the EC to restore the trust of all voters and opposition parties alike.

Read more

Will pre-election politics remain peaceful or become violent?

Another major concern about the by-polls is the "disappearance" of the main rival of the eventual winner in the Brahmanbaria-2 by-poll. This by-poll – which saw a voter turnout of less than 16 percent, the lowest of all constituencies – has been in the news ever since the winner, expelled BNP leader Abdus Sattar Bhuiyan, was backed by the ruling Awami League, which didn't field a candidate there. Abu Asif Ahmed, an independent candidate, has been missing for about a week now. Which makes us wonder: why is nothing being done to find him? What message does it send to the political opponents of the ruling party? And how long will the EC refuse to address the concerns of the opposition parties?

Read more

Is the EC fighting an unwinnable war?

The culture of fear, distrust and criminality that still plagues our electoral system must be removed, and the ruling party must play a leading role in this. Lack of violence in one election means nothing given how political violence and repression continue to occur in every other sphere. If anything, the recent by-polls have shown that we have remained stuck in the same spot for too long, and the authorities must allow genuine reforms to break this status quo. They must help create a level playing field for all parties, and restore public trust in the function of the electoral system.

On the same day that the home minister told journalists that law enforcement agencies would not restrict BNP if they hold peaceful programmes, one BNP activist was killed allegedly by police fire while scores were injured after a procession was blocked by police in Bhola. According to local BNP activists, who were protesting the rise in fuel prices and load shedding in the country, they had taken verbal permission to organise a rally and a procession. However, the police contest that the party did not take permission for the procession specifically, and that BNP supporters hurled brick chips and glass bottles at them when they intercepted it.

Read more

1 killed as police, BNP activists clash in Bhola

Let us assume that the police version of events is the correct one. Let us put aside the fact that in an ideal society, you would not need to request permission to exercise your right to protest. Let us also accept that it was the BNP protesters who became violent first. Even in these circumstances, is it fair for the police to use live bullets to bring a situation "under control"? Can the police become judge, jury and executioner and end the life of a man for hurling brick chips? Are there no methods of maintaining law and order other than using such excessive force? Equally importantly, what message does it send to the opposition political camp, especially when BNP is refusing to participate in the upcoming national election fearing undue interferences from the ruling party?

Read more

No bar on BNP to hold peaceful demos: minister

BNP activist Abdur Rahim is not the first person in the past week to have been killed after police interventions. On July 27, seven-month-old Sumaiya was shot in her mother's lap during election violence in Thakurgaon. On that evening too, the police were attacked by supporters of a defeated contestant, and apparently they opened fire in self-defence. The fact that an infant ended up being killed demonstrates just how reckless this firing must have been. Despite there being a provision in the police code for firing into the ground to frighten rioters, or at knee height to cause injury, we continue to see deaths as a result of lethal force from the police.

Every public institution run with taxpayers' money must be accountable to the people. This is all the more crucial for law enforcement agencies who are the only force legally empowered to detain, question, threaten, and sometimes even take the life of a citizen. A force with such power must adhere to the highest ethical standards, and follow procedure to the letter. Yet, what we continue to witness in Bangladesh can only be described as an abuse of power and a miscarriage of justice. Without accountability and immediate reforms, we fear more citizens will continue to die or suffer at the hands of law enforcement agencies.

Firstly, I find it impossible to call what's happening on January 7 an election in any way. People already know who will occupy government positions, who will sit in opposition, and even who will win which seats. An election without uncertainty, where people lack the power to determine their representatives through voting, is a mere facade of an election.

Read more

What comes after January 7?

Secondly, the voters do not have any real choice. Whether you pick candidates from Awami League, independent candidates (who are really representing AL in disguise), AL ally Jatiya Party, or candidates from any of AL's partner factions, it all leads to the same outcome: an Awami League dominance. Without options for voter representation, the January 7 event cannot be termed an election.

Thirdly, the escalating violence leading up to election day within Awami League factions in about every constituency paints a terrifying picture. I wonder, if this trend of violence continues, whether the drama staged to take place on the 7th will even be possible to conduct.

We already know that only a small group of experts will observe the election and that most major countries will not send their observers. International media outlets have already labelled this election as a "one-woman show" and a "one-horse electoral race."

Read more

‘Why would Awami League need to resort to rigging in this scenario?’

Considering everything, I see no reason to call this an election. It's a pre-written affair, and the public will bear the brunt of its outcome. Bangladesh's economic crisis will worsen, and the suffering we are already enduring will only be amplified in the future.

Rumeen Farhana is barrister-at-law and former whip of Bangladesh Nationalist Party.

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.

Mobile phone users in Barishal City Corporation have claimed that they are facing disruption in getting internet services since 10am today where a rally of Bangladesh Nationalist Party kicked off at 11am.

Sources in the telecom operators said the telecom regulator, Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC), has directed them to shut down 3G and 4G data services in Barishal City corporation from 10am to 8pm today.

The 3G and 4G technologies provide mobile internet services while 2G voice calls.

However, 2G service is kept operational, enabling the users in that area to make voice calls.

Although Barishal is almost cut off from the rest of the country, BNP leaders and activists kept pouring into the divisional city for the second straight day to join today's rally.

Earlier, the mobile internet users faced disruption in getting services for around 5 hours in Khulna City corporation area during the BNP rally on October 22.

When the top leadership of the Awami League and BNP, the two major political parties in Bangladesh, ruled out any possibility of talks ahead of the next parliamentary election, the Election Commission appeared in the scene by inviting the BNP to a dialogue.

Suspicious about the sudden invitation, the BNP rejected it outright, calling it "meaningless." Although the EC roadmap, announced late last year, did not say anything about talks with the political parties, it did mention that gaining their trust was a major challenge. But it did not spell out how that trust would be earned.

The EC invitation to BNP came at a time when Awami League and BNP leaders were both meeting with diplomats about the next election. It was widely reported that Western diplomats emphasised holding a free and fair election. To add to the context, the US Department of State has published its annual flagship human rights report where it was mentioned for the first time that the 2018 election was neither free nor fair. Charles Whiteley, the European Union ambassador to Bangladesh, said the EU would not send observers to the next election if it is not participatory. Now, if the international observers don't come, the election's credibility as well as the EC's role will remain under question.

Read more

In which direction is Bangladesh heading?

It could be said that the election authorities only acted responsibly when they invited the main opposition, seeing as the issue of a participatory election is under discussion right now. On the surface, at least, the EC has demonstrated their willingness to hold an inclusive, free and fair election. But one ought to ask what the EC is looking to achieve through these talks. Other than the commission gaining some mileage by showing their attempts, and the political parties playing to the gallery, there is not much that these talks would gain. In that respect, talks with the EC would be rather infructuous.

The invitation letter to the BNP also clarifies some things. While the Election Commission is fully aware of BNP's position regarding an election-time government, there is no comment related to that in the letter. To make any progress with the election, the stumbling blocks must be dealt with, and the commission must have a specific agenda for the talks – for instance, whether to use electronic voting machines (EVMs) or not. The invitation letter does not carry any such details. Then why hold these talks?

The Election Commission may claim that their goal is to ensure an inclusive 12th parliamentary election. But simply saying that is not enough, given the previous EC's complete failure to hold a credible election in 2018, and then even admitting that publicly.

The BNP should have taken time to deliberate over their decision before rejecting the EC invitation. Now they have to explain why they don't want to join the talks. Shunning the possibility of dialogues is not a good option for any political party. The only meaningful explanation could be that holding talks with the EC would, in fact, give it the legitimacy that the BNP has refused from the beginning. But it is unlikely that the main opposition camp has given the matter any such thought.

The incumbent EC could claim that they are different from their predecessors. But then, one could ask what this commission has done to earn the trust of all political parties. The commission's activities so far don't portray them in a favourable light, nor do they indicate sincere intentions. The BNP, which boycotted EC dialogues in June and July last year, has not shown any confidence in the electoral authority since its formation – and even before its formation, since the party did not join the talks initiated by the president and did not propose any name to the search committee of this EC. The party has repeatedly said that the EC would not be able to hold a free, fair and participatory general election.

The lack of trust for the Election Commission deepened when it went ahead with the decision to use EVMs in the upcoming general election, ignoring the objection of many political parties, including the BNP. That decision, while embracing modernity and change, was aligned with the desire of the ruling party.

Undoubtedly, rejecting the dialogue would be a setback for the BNP as it would garner criticism from the ruling party. The EC would be able to say that they tried, but could not bring BNP to the table. BNP leaders would have to remain busy for a few days parrying all the criticism. The party may even face questions from the international community.

Read more

Political dialogues: The long road to nowhere

The BNP should have taken time to deliberate over their decision before rejecting the EC invitation. Now they have to explain why they don't want to join the talks. Shunning the possibility of dialogues is not a good option for any political party. The only meaningful explanation could be that holding talks with the EC would, in fact, give it the legitimacy that the BNP has refused from the beginning. But it is unlikely that the main opposition camp has given the matter any such thought.

Having said all that, the political parties can take advantage of the situation as it suits their strategy, but not the Election Commission, which is a constitutional body and assigned to hold a free, fair and participatory election. Lip service or mere show of effort may not be enough.

Listening to the trials and tribulations of this political reporter, and learning that the EC had invited the opposition to the table, a relative recounted an anecdote about the stingy hosts of a certain part of the country, where guests would often arrive on boats. The story goes like this: in this certain region, the hosts keep mum as the guests get ready to leave and get on their boat to return home, and just when the hosts push off the boat, they say, "I wish you had stayed a few more days with us." But by then the boat is already sailing, and the guests have nothing but to say, "Next time!"

Mohammad Al-Masum Molla is chief reporter at The Daily Star.