Security in elections

WITNESSING the downward slide of our electoral system as it unfolded in the last four phases of upazila elections one can conclude that people are once again losing faith in the system. One was hoping against hope that perhaps our Election Commission (EC), with all its tough talks a day prior to the fourth phase, in which elections were held in 91 upazilas on March 23, would have brought some sort of relief to the voters. But it was not to be. Violence in the fourth phase surpassed that of the third phase with death toll mounting to 6. The death tally has now risen to around eleven in all the phases of elections so far conducted.
In the backdrop of violence during the third phase and mounting debate prior to the fourth phase, the army was, for the first time, asked by the EC to act under CrPC 131. By no means has this Section of CrPC given magistracy power, rather it dispenses with the mandatory presence of a magistrate as and when the armed forces, deployed “in aid of civil power,” are required to take measures against any unlawful assembly or violence threatening the forces. This too has to be in presence of a commissioned officer, as the armed forces are deployed “in aid of civil power” to assist the EC.
One may note that armed forces were taken out of the 'Law Enforcing Agency' definition given in the electoral laws. Technically, the armed forces were handicapped by this amendment. Therefore, it became difficult for them to act within the electoral law. Perhaps that could be one reason that we did not see the armed forces acting as expected, being the stronger force deployed as 'striking force.' It is now felt that to make the 'striking force' more effective the armed forces should have been included in the definition of 'Law Enforcing Agencies.'
Security is the most singular concern of any election, particularly of large-scale elections like upazila, even if they are conducted in phases. It is not only in Bangladesh, but even in developing and some developed countries security remains the prime concern of election management bodies. One of the major concerns of the Election Commission of India is security. However, in India, Central Reserve Force (CRP) acts as striking force in phased elections. In fact, CRP overrides State Police in national elections. CRP is moved from one part of the country to another to provide security. In this regard, former CEC of India Dr. S Y Quraishi, during his recent visit to Bangladesh, stated: “It is primarily due to security reasons that Election Commission of India conducts the national poll in phases.”
Violence in elections in this part of the world is not new but the degree varies, especially when it pertains to local elections. From 2008 -2013 electoral violence was brought to the minimum. There was hardly any loss of life in polls conducted in the period mentioned. A few of the elections were conducted by the present EC. Therefore, the question is, why has the EC not been able to control the gradual escalation in violence when all kinds of resources were deployed in the just concluded upazila elections? Not that the EC was totally oblivious of the fact that in most of the places violence occurred coupled with election corruption.
A day before the fourth phase polls, the EC issued strong warning and was seen sending verbal massages, as telecast in the electronic media, yet there was no letup in election corruption and violence. According to EC's count, polling was suspended in 36 poll centres, but various reports suggest that more capturing of polling booths, ballot stuffing, snatching and destruction of ballot boxes occurred in front of the law enforcing agencies especially deployed within the perimeter of the booths. It is to be noted that, except members of police and Ansar, members of other forces are not deployed within the polling centers in normal situation. Other forces designated to provide backup to the polling centre security staff can enter a centre only if and when such assistance is called for by the presiding officer. However, whether such assistance was asked for is not known, but from the print news and some TV coverage it appeared that optimum use of striking force was not made.
Security in any election is planned in three phases -- one, pre-poll security mainly to maintain law and order during campaign period; two, during the poll; and three after the poll. Normally, striking and other forces are deployed couple of days before and after the polling day. Security arrangement must cover the physical security of polling staff and the centre to assist conduct of smooth polling, and create an atmosphere in which voters feel safe to vote and return home. But in the ongoing upazilla elections serious security lapses have been observed. It seemed that there was lack of coordination within the forces in most cases and lack of commitment of some presiding and returning offices in some places, which contributed to malpractices coupled with violence.  
Conduct of free and fair election is the constitutional obligation of the EC. A free election means that voters are free of any fear and intimidation and able to cast their vote. Fairness of election means that the votes are translated into the reflection of the voters will. Freeness of election mostly depends on the security atmosphere and on the honest and accurate counting of votes. If elections are not free and fair then the system will not get legitimacy. Bernard Grofman and Arend Lijphart, prominent electoral governance experts, said: “The legitimacy of the electoral process is crucial for the establishment and maintenance of a healthy democracy.”
Be that as it may, the EC should do soul-searching to remove the roadblocks to conduct of free and fair elections. Every election in this country puts up different challenges, just like the changing battlefield presents new challenging situations. Thus, conduct of elections, like a battle, needs proper assessment, arrangement and management to deal with unforeseen situations. We hope to see a free and fair election all the time, which is the minimum that our voters deserve.

The writer is former election commissioner and column writer.