There is no way that this letter can be dismissed as unimportant. As the largest fund provider of the UN, the US has significant clout. And as a superpower, it has control and coordination over the majority of countries in the world. So it can well take initiative to involve the UN in Bangladesh’s election.
Given Russia and China’s veto power, it is unlikely that such an initiative will be passed at the UN Security Council. But at the behest of the US or any other country, the UN General Assembly may also take such initiative. In recent times, by mandate of the UN Security Council or the General Assembly, elections have been held under UN supervision is certain African countries (for example, Mali, Sudan, Central African Republic and Congo).
However, such precedence is still rare. In most cases, the UN has been involved in such election processes at the request of the concerned countries and that too principally involves technical assistance. Such assistance has included developing the capacity of the election commission, the election tribunal or the election administration, reforming the election laws, voter education, etc. As this is generally done at the request of the member state, there is nothing dishonourable about the issue. In Nepal, the UN has been providing such election assistance from 2008.
UN involvement can be uncomfortable for a country if it is about certification regarding the fairness of the election or if the UN is in charge of the election supervision. The UN can appoint its peacekeeping mission and other offices in its task to create an environment conducive to elections. Over the past two decades, the UN has been directly involved in the supervision and conducting elections of a few African countries riddled with civil war. Even Bangladesh had been a part of the peacekeeping missions in some of these countries.
Bangladesh’s state of security cannot be compared to that of those countries. At the same time, the manner in which Bangladesh’s election system has broken down, cannot be ignored. Also, over the last few years Bangladesh has been internationally castigated for enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killing and suppression of dissent. Given such circumstances, the possibility of UN involvement in Bangladesh’s next election, even on a limited scale, cannot be dismissed. The opposition and a large number of voter aspirants may even welcome such a move. This, however, may sit uneasy with the government.
2.
Elections, in accordance to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and any such relevant documents of the UN, mean periodic and genuine elections. Based on these principles, almost from the very outset the UN has been involved in running elections in former colonies and areas under its trusteeship council.
After innumerable instances of fake elections in Africa, Asia and South America since the eighties, the UN also began its involvement in the election of independent states. In order to coordinate this, in 1991 the General Assembly set up a framework for election cooperation. The undersecretary of the General Assembly’s concerned department (Department of Political and Peace Building Affairs) functions as the focal point of this cooperation, with the support of the department’s election assistance division.
In the countries where there are UN peacekeeping missions, this division works with the mission to jointly resolve the election related problems. Where there are no such missions, the division basically works with UNDP.
This institutional framework makes UN involvement in the election process of any country easier. The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) creates an additional moral boost to such involvement. Fair elections are a part of various SDG. This includes Goal 16, about promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice for all and building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions. Goal 10 is about reducing inequalities. And so the scope to contend that an election is completely a country’s internal matter, is gradually shrinking.
3.
The government is none too pleased about intervention by the UN or any foreign country into the election, and that is only expected. But there is scope to question the Awami League government’s moral credibility in raising any objections in this regard. In the past, that is from 1996 to 2007-08, Awami League and other opposition parties at the time kept up regular contact with the foreign diplomatic missions for such intervention. Towards the end of BNP’s last term, the ambassadors of the US, UK and India as well as the UN resident representative, had caught attention by their various activities carried out in apprehension of rigged elections.
The case of Awami League’s moral stand against foreign intervention is further weakened when one recalls the incidents involving India’s ‘role’ in the 2014 and 2018 elections. Also, the concern from within the country and from foreign quarters regarding the next election, hardly seems misplaced given the manner in which the 2018 election took place despite the prime minister’s repeated commitments.
The government must come to a decision as to which risk it is better to avoid – losing power through the election, or damaging Bangladesh at an international level
4.
We must all keep in mind that as a UN member state, we all follow a global legal framework. We are also legally bound with other states as partners of various multilateral systems including international trade, investment and peacekeeping forces. And so playing the sovereignty card to justify a one-sided election and human rights violation is not plausible. In doing so, if a situation like that in Myanmar or North Korea emerges, this may bode well for an individual, family or group, but it will do irreparable harm to the country.
The effective way to avoid foreign intervention in the election is to build up the confidence and a consensus among all stakeholders in the country. If the government doesn’t bother about that, but instead goes ahead with fake cases and assaulting the opposition, then it will not be easy to avoid foreign intervention. The credibility of a universal global system like the UN is multiple times higher than that of any state.
If the government wants to prevent any such circumstance, it must come to an understanding with the opposition about the election system and the election commission. The government must come to a decision as to which risk it is better to avoid – losing power through the election, or damaging Bangladesh at an international level.
* Asif Nazrul is a professor of law at the University of Dhaka.
* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir