Daily Times

Since the Bangladeshi parliamentary election held on January 5, 2014, several articles have appeared in the national dailies. There were many divergent views — some have justified holding the election for the sake of constitutional reasons and argued that a bad election was still better than no election. Others point out that the election fell short of democratic standards and failed to reflect the verdict of the people. There was disagreement on the number of people who cast votes — the estimates varied from five to 20 percent. The president, the prime minister, the speaker and the chief election commissioner were amongst the people who either could not or did not vote. The leader of the opposition was interned and could not cast her vote either. By any standards, this latest parliamentary election held in Bangladesh was unique. Civil society and the international community rejected the outcome of the election. They demanded fresh elections as early as possible in order to not derail Bangladesh’s democratic trajectory.
Prior to the parliamentary election the ruling coalition realised that the turnout of voters would be low and would not engender electoral legitimacy. Following the election the heavyweights of the ruling party became unhinged at the boycott of the election in 52 polling centres in Dhaka where hardly a voter was seen during polling hours. Driven by the desire to not be isolated at home and abroad, the leaders of the ruling party suggested that the government would be open to discussing the election. Over time there has been a shift in the mindset of the leadership. Now they are dismissing any dialogue and have reiterated their resolve to complete their five year term. The Jatiya Party (JP), which has suffered from both moral and political bankruptcy, now forms an integral part of the ruling coalition as well as of the opposition. Though JP is both in the government as well as the opposition, its presence is not felt in either.
There was unprecedented violence preceding the election. Activists of the right wing Jamaat-e-Islami formed the strike force. Its senior leaders were imprisoned and facing trials. Some of them were awarded death sentences for crimes committed during the 1971 liberation war and other leaders faced similar charges. Thus the Jamaat activists were in all-out confrontation with the law enforcement agencies. On the other hand, the brutal response by the law enforcement agencies against the activists made them even more desperate and added a new dimension to the violence. Though the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) opposed the election held under the incumbent government, it was not clear whether it had sanctioned such a high level of violence. The consequences were however far reaching; trade and commerce came to a halt, the transportation system was severely disrupted and civic life was totally paralysed. Following the election, for obvious reasons, this level of pressure could not be maintained and normalcy was gradually restored. The government characterised the ‘return to normalcy’ as a rejection by the people of opposition-sponsored violence.
The government took advantage of relative peace and began consolidating its position. India was quick to accord recognition to the new government. One Indian daily drew parallels between the January 5 elections and the election held in Punjab in 1989 where the Akali Dal secured no more than nine percent of the votes. It justified the election in Bangladesh as a constitutional obligation, but other dailies castigated New Delhi for being too supportive of the ruling coalition. Members of the international community including the US and European countries also accorded recognition to the new government but remained firm in their demands for an early, all-inclusive participatory election. The new government claims that the international community has accepted its legitimacy. This is far from the truth. As long as diplomatic relations are not severed, diplomats of foreign countries will continue to do business with the host government but at a minimum level. The US ambassador has unequivocally said his country’s relationship with Bangladesh is far from being normal.
Hardly had the ‘spite’ of convoluted parliamentary elections begun to fade than the government decided to hold the upazilla (sub-district) elections in order to gain political mileage. The ruling party leadership calculated that the BNP was in disarray and would not reverse its decision to participate in the local elections. The prediction failed and opposition parties led by the BNP endorsed candidates at the local election. The two phases of the local elections held on February 19 and 27 marked a significant victory for the BNP. Its nominees won 101 upazilla chairman posts as against 79 by the Awami League. On vice-chairman posts, the BNP scored 60 as against 52 by the ruling party. On ‘women vice-chairman’ posts, the BNP won 78 as against 60 by the ruling party. JP put up a dismal performance and fell far behind the Jamaat-e-Islami. It remains to be seen how the remaining three phases of local elections are held. The opposition parties and civil society have expressed foreboding about heavy-handedness by ruling party candidates.
The outcome of the local elections has provided a much needed boost to the BNP but it is still not well equipped to launch a mass movement to destabilise the government. Its leadership should now take pause and evaluate its strategy. It should take a critical look at how its agitation was perceived by the people and how it should conduct itself in future. The BNP’s record of mass outreach, its continued boycott of parliament and failure to articulate the strategy of the movement has greatly discredited its leadership. It could not defend its own ‘caretaker formula’ when it was tabled in parliament. Calling on the government to resign a few months after it formed, lack of interest in interacting with government counterparts, and asking for more seats in the front rows of parliament exposed the political bankruptcy of the party. The central working committee has failed miserably to provide guidance to its workers. The party needs overhauling from the central committee down to district levels with the induction of young and committed acolytes.
The BNP should not fall prey to the provocations of the ruling party. Instead, it should focus on drafting strategies on how to promote bilateral relations with India, develop strategy for future interim governments to oversee general elections, the reconstitution of the Election Commission and Anti-corruption Commission, depoliticisation of the bureaucracy and police, promotion of rule of law and retrenchment of corruption in society. People are no longer keen for one party to simply replace another. They would prefer to see a comprehensive manifesto outlining future economic, trade and external relations and a blueprint for good governance. Begum Khaleda Zia still enjoys huge popularity. She should begin visiting outlying districts and inspire young acolytes and leaders about the goals of the party. The leadership should also pay attention to the practice of democracy within the party. Dictatorship in the party promotes party dictatorship in the country. The present crisis in the country is largely the result of one-person rule in the ruling as well as in the opposition parties. Anathema for dictatorship should be practiced at all layers of political organisations. Bangladesh deserves nothing less than popularly elected secular, progressive and forward looking government.

The author is a former official of the United Nations