Law watch
Analysis of RPO
Does the law ensure governance in candidate selection?
Md. Abdul Alim
Before the 9th parliamentary election, the key electoral legal framework of Bangladesh, the Representation of People Order, 1972 (RPO) was revised and many milestone initiatives were included in the law. One of the initiatives was to bring intra-party democracy in selecting candidates by the political parties. In order to address the issue, two historic provisions were made in the law. The first provision, described in Article 90B(b)(iv) of the law (P.O. No. 42 of 2008) states that the political party has 'to finalise nomination of candidate by central parliamentary board of the party from the panels prepared by the members of the Ward, Union, Thana, Upazila or District committee, as the case may be, of concerned constituency'. The 2nd provision which is promulgated under Article 12(1)(j) describes that a person is disqualified (not applicable for an independent candidate) for election if he is not been a member of a registered party for three years.
Analysing the two provisions, it is observed that there are some objectives behind the motives: (i) to ensure intra-party democracy in candidate selection, (ii) to stop selling nomination by the parties or senior party leaders, (iii) to prevent non-politicians such as civil servants, army officials etc. to become a candidate just after retirement, (iv) to prevent non-political business magnet to become a candidate from a political party and (v) to stop nomination of politicians switching from other parties.
The first provision was mandatory in the 9th parliamentary election and second one has now become mandatory as parties have already completed 3 years after getting registration with Election Commission for Bangladesh (ECB). Now the question is: did the parties follow the first provision in the 9th parliamentary election? About Bangladesh Awami League's nomination Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) study on Local Participation and Expectations in the Nomination Process of the National Elections observed that 'in most of the constituencies nominations were made from the recommended panel in the 9th parliamentary election. Nevertheless, in some constituencies there was little reflection of the grassroots opinion as it was ignored and nomination was not given from the proposed panel'. About BNP's nomination the study finds that 'in most cases their (local BNP leaders) opinion was hardly reflected in the final nomination'. The study also finds that in only 52% cases local leaders of the political parties participate in candidate nomination process.
Both the above-mentioned provisions were made during the time of CTG and later when the law passed in the parliament in 2009, an amendment was made with the Article 90B(b)(iv). According to this latest revision central parliamentary board of the party only considers the panels of nomination prepared by the grass-root committees. If we analyse the objectives of the move described earlier and the reality, we can identify the following shortcomings.
A. The registration criterion [Article 90B(1)(a)(iii)] does not have any mention that the parties have to form committees at Union and Ward level, but the nomination criterion [Article 90B(b)(iv)] makes mandatory provision to collect feedback from the Ward and Union committees along with district and thana/upazila committees. This is contradictory as there is no provision to form Union/Ward committees, how do parties receive feedback from those committees?
B. According to registration criterion [Article 90B(1)(a)(iii)], a party is allowed to get registration if it establishes 'district offices in at least in one-third administrative districts, offices and at least one hundred Upazilas or Metropolitan Thana'. So a party needs not to establish offices at all districts and thanas/upazilas. Now the question is if there is no office/committee in a specific district/thana/upazila and if the party wants to nominate a candidate from a constituency of that area, who will recommend the panel for nomination? In this case, there is no way to violate the RPO provision.
C. Article 12(1)(j) of the RPO clearly tells that a candidate nominated by a registered political party must have membership for three years. The question is how BEC will understand who is a member of BAL and who is a member of BNP? The RPO does not have any mandatory provision that the parties have to submit and/or update their membership base to BEC time to time. As a result, there is scope by the parties to show someone as a candidate who is not a member of the party for three years. Assume Mr. X is not a member of a particular party, but the party wants to nominate him as a candidate and it is very easy for the party to show him as their member by submitting papers with back date.
D. After revising the law in 2009, party only can collect list of panel from the grass-root committees, but central parliamentary board is not bound to select candidates from this list of panels. As a result, we are assuming that the previous practice of nominating candidates will back again and the party high-ups will enjoy all in all power to nominate candidates. So, there would be chance of corruption and lack of intra-party democracy in candidate selection. In the case of Simin Hossain Rimi, BAL didn't collect any suggestions or feedback from grass-root committees and the decision was taken by the party high-ups.
Suggestions: (i) RPO has to make a provision that the parties have to establish membership database, update it on a regular basis and submit to BEC once a year. The concerned membership base could be stored in the respective local offices of BEC and local election officials could be given responsibility to verify the information during the time of election. (ii) The nomination provision of the RPO [Article 90B(b)(iv)] could be revised to ensure meaningful intra-party democracy, e.g. parties could hold council for nomination of candidates. Many countries have such kind of practice. The German Law on Political Parties requires that "the nomination of candidates for election to all levels of government must be by secret ballot. The nomination procedure shall be as prescribed by the election laws and party statutes." Article 21 of the law provides that there are three ways that a party can nominate a candidate, i.e. through an assembly of party members, or a special assembly or a general assembly of party representatives. (iii) The time between the declaration of election schedule and finalization of nomination is very limited in Bangladesh. During this limited time, it is impossible to verify information provided by the candidates. The timeframe could be extended and the parties could tell to submit a potential list of candidates six months earlier of the election so that BEC can verify information about the candidates. (iv) CSOs in Bangladesh are very strong. There are lots of NGOs/CSOs work in the field of election. The RPO should make a provision to include these organizations to oversee nomination by the parties. (v) Although the law says to select candidate based on the recommendations by the grass-root committees, there is no provision to oversee whether the parties follow the procedure or not. The RPO could make a provision that a candidate nominated by a political party has to submit the list of panel prepared by grass-root committees along with the nomination submitted to ECB.
The writer is a former Head of Election Project, UNDP Bangladesh, presently pursuing PhD in the field of electoral governance. E-mail: [email protected]
