Unhealthy election controversy must be resolved

The eagerly awaited meeting between Chief Adviser Prof Muhammad Yunus and the BNP ended, as expected, with a major difference of opinion on the election dates. The CA stuck to his well-known stance that the election will be held anytime between December 2025 and June 2026, and the BNP stuck to its position that the polls must be held by the end of this year. In contrast to most of their previous meetings, the BNP, for the first time, expressed serious dissatisfaction afterwards.

However, Dr Asif Nazrul, law adviser to the interim government had his own narrative that the BNP did not “appear dissatisfied” and stressed that “under no circumstances will the election go beyond June next year.” Prior to that, he said the election cannot be held until the trial for the crimes against humanity committed during the July uprising is completed. This raises the legitimate question: can a judicial process be set in a time-barred manner, and if so, will it be acceptable internationally? The chief prosecutor of the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT), Advocate Tajul Islam, had objected earlier when such a time limit was set for the crucial trials.

The Jamaat-e-Islami ameer, on his part, has said that the election should not go beyond the next Ramadan, which, in calendar terms, means that it should occur before the last quarter of February 2026. It sounds like a well-thought-out middle ground.

The election proponents think setting up a democratically elected government is the most important task at hand. It will restore the people’s right to choose their own leaders, to get a parliament where policies will be transparently discussed and adopted, and to get a government that can be held accountable. The interim nature of our present governance process will come to an end, and we will be able to relaunch our democratic journey. Most importantly, the feeling of uncertainty will come to an end and be replaced by a sense of stability that only an elected government with the people’s mandate can provide.

At present, the world is dealing with us mostly because of the personal prestige and stature of one person, Prof Yunus, and not due to the legitimacy of the government he heads. Whatever the extent of our pride for having a leader of his stature may be, it cannot substitute for the prestige and acceptance of a government with people’s mandate. Genuine democracy has been our source of pride from the time of our Liberation War, and we condemned Sheikh Hasina for having deprived us of that. Thus, restoration of democracy and getting an elected government should not be unnecessarily delayed.

Those who are opposed to having the election by December this year feel that time is inadequate for reforms and holding the election will mean restoring the rotten practices of the past, which included dynastic politics and one-person rule. The argument they use—one which has a strong emotional appeal—is that moving to the old-style politics will make a farce of the sacrifice of 1,400 lives during the uprising. This sentiment is very strong and should by no means be ignored. Whatever we do, we must incorporate the fundamental values—democracy, freedoms, rights of all groups and individuals, equality, anti-discrimination, a nation under law, political accountability, etc— that the uprising tried to evoke in all our future actions.

But the need for reforms, which is a widely accepted notion, should not be used as an excuse to postpone the election. Just as these fundamental reforms are necessary, so is an elected government. This author and this newspaper have repeatedly written about how we need and can have both the reforms and election by December.

We have not been able to decipher why the CA insists on the six-month time variation. One could understand this position during the early days, when it was uncertain how much time would be required by the reform commissions. But now all the reform recommendations are in. The follow-up process—dialogue with the political parties—has also been very efficiently started. We think Prof Yunus’s approach has so far been hugely effective. If the same pace is followed, then within the eight months that is left before the December deadline, significant reforms can be agreed upon and instituted. If we accept the two and half months delay as proposed by Jamaat—till before next Ramadan—then the interim government should have no reason not to announce the election roadmap. The Election Commission has announced its preparedness.

From this newspaper’s point of view, June does pose a lot of challenges for holding the elections in terms of weather conditions. Except for one election in June 1996—following the resignation of Khaleda Zia’s government in February 1996 and the constitutional requirement to hold an election within 90 days—all the elections since the fall of military rule in 1990 have been held in winter months. The arguments for elections in winter are solid: no rain, no floods and pleasant temperature, all of which contributes to giving the national polls a festive colour and mood. So why the CA wants to take the risk of facing natural calamity that may jeopardise his fundamental commitment to the people is not really clear.

The election uncertainty has been further exacerbated by a social media campaign that Prof Yunus should continue in power for several more years. This, of course, is a tribute to his stature, prestige, and the public confidence in his leadership. But there are many other forces, with not the best of intentions for the CA, who may be working behind it. There is a public perception that a section of his interim cabinet, who will have to relinquish their coveted position the moment the CA hands over power to an elected government, is adding fuel to this campaign. This suspicion has unnecessarily been given credence by the home affairs adviser, who said people had gone to him saying, “Prof Yunus should prolong his stay for five years.” Social media campaigns are one thing, but comments made by a senior cabinet member—which he tried to explain saying that it was not his opinion and that he was only repeating what ordinary people were telling him—generate doubts.

Whether such a step, however well-intentioned, is politically wise, institutionally possible, legally acceptable, and good for Prof Yunus’s national and global reputation, is something that should be seriously thought about. As we all know, the legal thread on which the legitimacy of this government hangs is an opinion (not a judgment) by the Appellate Division, made to address a special circumstance. As his lifelong admirer and sincere well-wisher, I think that an undue extension of his tenure would mire Prof Yunus into unnecessary and, for him, undignified controversies.

We understand the BNP’s eagerness for an early election, and that not all of it is based on altruism. We also understand that the reluctance of the National Citizen Party (NCP) regarding the election being held before significant reforms and trials of Sheikh Hasina and others has a lot of partisan considerations behind it. Jamaat’s ambivalence is also based on partisan factors. So our national interests are not getting the priority that they deserve.

We have three stakeholders on the issue of election: the interim government; the political parties of all shades; and the voters. The viewpoints that we have so far heard belong to the first and second groups of stakeholders. As to what the general public wants, we do not yet know and have heard very little. That has been a major flaw of us journalists. We cannot claim to know. On the bases of our past reporting and experience, we can make an educated guess that they would want their right to vote—which they have been deprived of since 2014—restored. But they would also want stability, economic growth, price stability, employment, etc, all of which is linked to the economy, which in turn needs stability to bear fruit. So both the right to vote and economic growth can be triggered and sustained mainly through the return of an elected government.

Hence, our argument is in favour of an election by December 2025, with an additional six weeks to accommodate Prof Yunus’s wish for more time, till the middle of February 2026.

Mahfuz Anam is the editor and publisher of The Daily Star.