Is there really a level playing field?

All strong democracies in the world also have strong election monitoring bodies, such as the Election Commission of India, and the Federal Election Commission in the USA.

When we say the Election Commission is strong — synonymous to independent in case an election is taking place under partisan arrangements — we mean that the regulatory body has the strength to ensure a “level playing field” for all.

A level playing field is generally described as a concept about fairness, in which not every player has equal chances to succeed, but they all play by the same set of rules.

For every kind of election — both national and local — the Election Commission of Bangladesh has separate “electoral codes of conduct” that participants, supporters, and state bodies must fully obey. In fact, this is the necessary “set of rules” that is meant for ensuring a “level playing field” before and during elections in Bangladesh.

Every time an election is held in Bangladesh, opposition parties keep clamouring about a level playing field; they want the EC to ensure that participants associated with the ruling parties do not make undue use of the state-provided facilities.

The concept may not be non-existent altogether, but it surely is vague because the EC’s code of conduct — if fully obeyed by all participants — can only ensure equal opportunity in material terms; it remains vague because the “same set of rules” does not address the psychological and ideological issues.

When the supporters of Sayeed Khokon, ruling Awami League-backed mayoral candidate for Dhaka south, gather and obstruct vehicular movement at Shiddeswari, it is a clear violation of section 6(1)b of the electoral code of conduct.

Police say nothing because they are all supporters of the ruling party-backed candidate, although this obstruction is taking place right in front of the Ramna police station. But the wife of Mirza Abbas, a senior leader of opposition BNP and Khokon’s strongest competitor, does not get the same “facility” of being overlooked by law enforcers.

Take the example of the South African cricket team playing on a fast and bouncy Perth turf in Australia. No matter how good your batsmen are, or how fast your bowlers may bowl, the home team will always enjoy the home advantage.

They hardly ever managed to put up a real fight against the Aussies, even when they had the likes of Jack Kallis, Gary Kirsten, Allan Donald, and Makhaya Ntini. Very little has changed although they now have batsmen like AB De Villiers, and Hashim Amla, and fiery bowlers like Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel.

Given all these, however, this time around, vague as it may sound, the level playing field — if it exists at all — is strangely benefitting the BNP-led opposition alliance’s candidates.

BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia — also a former three-time prime minister of Bangladesh and two-time main opposition leader in parliament — found herself and her party out of parliament for the first time in more than two decades after they had boycotted the January 5, 2014 national polls in which the AL and company won with a clean sweep, literally uncontested.

This also means that none of the senior BNP leaders, including Khaleda, hold any government portfolio and are therefore free to take part in canvassing for their favourite candidates in the upcoming city polls without violating section 14 of the code of conduct which bars parliament speakers, whips, ministers, and people from similar ranks from physically attending canvassing.

The BNP is already expecting that their chief Khaleda Zia will take part in campaigning in favour of their mayoral candidates –Tabith M Awal in the north, and Mirza Abbas in the south.

Annisul Huq, the ruling party backed mayoral candidate in the north, has already said that if Khaleda Zia came out, it would mar the level playing field. The AL — happy no doubt at BNP’s exodus from parliament — is all of a sudden feeling the boomerang effect.

If Khaleda Zia takes part in campaigning, it would no doubt be a clear upper-hand and a strong moral booster for both candidates and voters. AL President Sheikh Hasina, being the prime minister, cannot do what her counterpart can.

In fact, party stalwarts like Tofail Ahmed, Amir Hossain Amu, Mohammad Nasim, and so on are all ministers and therefore will not be able to come out in support of their candidates. Needless to say, only Sheikh Hasina can generate the same buzz as Khaleda Zia, and vice versa.