Disenfranchising the majority by eliminating potential challengers for the third consecutive time risks instigating despair, unlikely to dissipate anytime soon, writes Kamal Ahmed
SEVERAL economists, known for their economical use of words, find themselves echoing a sentiment on the recent polling day. After 2:00pm, Dr Hossain Zillur Rahman took to social media platform X, tweeting enigmatically about ‘The presence of absence.’ It wasn’t challenging to grasp his implication. Subsequently, reports emerged indicating a voter turnout slightly over 26 per cent until 3:00pm, suggesting that a majority of voters saw little purpose in going to a polling centre when the choices were seemingly limited to the Awami League and its proxy candidates.
Even if we entertain the chief election commissioner Kazi Habibul Awal’s assertion of a 42 per cent turnout, with an unconvincing rate of voting making nearly one-third of the votes cast in the final hour, this figure falls well below the average voter participation in elections held under caretaker administrations in 1996, 2001, and 2008. The 2008 election, marking the commencement of AL’s current rule with a record 48 per cent vote, saw a peak turnout of 87 per cent. The January 7 turnout aligns more closely with the one-sided election under the Awami League in 2014 when 154 of its nominees were elected unopposed. This figure also significantly lags behind all other elections since independence, averaging around 55 per cent, ranging between 51 per cent and 60 per cent.
Now, numerous candidates affiliated with AL and its alliance partners, including top leaders Hasanul Huq Inu, Fazle Hossain Badsha, Anwar Hossain Manju, and Abdus Sobhan Golap, have raised concerns about an unusually high number of fraudulent votes favouring their opponents. Independent reports suggest that realistically, the turnout could not have exceeded 20 per cent.
Ironically, despite a decade of backroom deals, intimidation, inducements, and the encouragement of party members to run as dummy candidates, voter turnout did not improve. One plausible explanation is that even some party loyalists felt no urgency to contribute to a predetermined outcome.
While opinion polls can be controversial, one particular survey is worth noting, especially since AL leaders, particularly general secretary Obaidul Quader, frequently referred to it. The survey by the International Republican Institute last August found that 92 per cent of voters wanted to participate in the scheduled national election. Notably, 69 per cent of them did not support elections held under a partisan government. This survey aligns with higher turnouts in elections conducted under a neutral or non-partisan administration.
Disregarding suspicions surrounding the official turnout figure, the poor showing does not qualify the recent election as participatory, especially given the boycott by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and several other parties. Instead, the mass absence should be interpreted as a protest against the one-sided nature of the vote.
Disenfranchising the majority by eliminating potential challengers for the third consecutive time risks instigating despair, unlikely to dissipate anytime soon. The Awami League should heed lessons from its own history; repression on political opponents tends to strengthen their resolve and consolidate organisational unity. BNP and its allies vow to continue their movement for the restoration of voting rights, and the momentum for reinstating the caretaker system may regain strength sooner than waiting for the next five years.
Additionally, the Awami League’s vulnerability lies in its internal transformation. An analysis by Sujon reveals that nearly 60 per cent of AL nominees are businessmen, sidelining experienced politicians and relying more on bureaucrats and corporate entities. This shift could lead to increased influence from interest groups, weakening the rule of law.
The dismal outcome for the official opposition in parliament, mirroring trends in by-elections and local government elections, was predictable. Though their presence in parliament was never intended to hold the government accountable, the latest setback may signal the end of their opportunistic disservice to the nation.
While the ruling party may feel a sense of accomplishment in suppressing the opposition and may contemplate banning the BNP by branding it a terrorist organisation, such a move would be short-sighted and counterproductive.
Instead, the Awami League should immediately take initiatives to start a national dialogue to find a political settlement on the dispute that emanated from the one-sided election in 2014, when the prime minister initially offered a second election if an agreement was reached with the opposition. Abandoning that initiative left politics plunged into a never-ending crisis over finding a mechanism for holding credible elections.
In contrast, the resolution of the dispute and a second election in 1996 gave the country relative stability and democratic polity for a decade until it was undone by the BNP through constitutional amendment for taking unfair advantage. This political opportunism is the reason they have been paying the price for nearly two decades. There is only one way to avoid a similar fate in the future; it should reach out to the opposition, settle their differences, and allow people to choose their representatives on their free will as soon as possible.
Another finding of the IRI survey should worry us all that 53 per cent of people thought the country is headed in the wrong direction. The one-sided affair in the name of fulfilling constitutional obligations leaves us in political uncertainty, making the prospect of steering the country in the right direction even more elusive.
Kamal Ahmed is an independent journalist.
New Age
