Bangladesh Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal’s Ducsu Election 2025 panel has alleged “rigging” centering on ballot paper issues and accused the Dhaka University administration of 11 cases of irregularities.
Abidul Islam Khan, the VP candidate from the Chhatra Dal panel, read out a written statement outlining these irregularities at around 11:30am on Monday at DU’s Madhur Canteen, two weeks after the election.
Abid said: “Until the administration clarifies its position on conducting a fair election, we have no scope to legitimize this election from our standpoint.”
Chhatra Dal also alleged that, despite reporting various irregularities after the election schedule was announced, their teachers had failed to uphold the dignity of trust by not providing any solutions.
Ballot paper issue
The Abid-Hamim-Mayed Council, backed by Chhatra Dal, alleged that pre-marked ballots were present at booths. They further referred to the 2019 Ducsu election, stating that the absence of serial numbers on ballot papers at the time had allowed Chhatra League to manipulate votes secretly.
“Unfortunately, the ballot papers used in this election also lacked serial numbers. Moreover, the number of printed ballots, the number supplied to polling centers, used ballots, canceled ballots, and ballots returned after voting concluded were never disclosed. Even after repeated requests, polling agents at centers were not provided with this information,” the statement read.
The panel further claimed that no information was released regarding which press printed the ballot papers: “Allegations of vote manipulation through fake ballots leaked from insecure printing houses have already surfaced. Notably, on September 7, 2025, a large number of Ducsu and hall parliament ballot papers were found unguarded at a printing house in Gausul Azam Market, Nilkhet—where it was confirmed that DU administration had no oversight.”
Additional ‘irregularities’
According to Chhatra Dal, voters and candidates were not informed during the verification of vote-counting machines and software accuracy. They also alleged that the polling agents’ list was published at midnight during voting, some candidates were excluded from their proposed centers, and many polling agents could not enter centers due to delays in receiving ID cards: “While voting was supposed to take place at 8 designated centers, it was held at 18 centers, making it difficult to appoint polling agents.”
They further argued that the process of appointing polling officers was unclear and that many candidates faced complaints based on false information about electoral conduct: “There were also allegations of biased roles by BNCC, Rover Scout, and Girls Guide members responsible for security, as well as unauthorized entry of outsiders. Polling agents were also effectively sidelined during vote counting.”
Chhatra Dal additionally reported the use of non-transparent ballot boxes, voting with ballpoint pens due to the lack of markers, inaccurate counting by OMR machines, and the possibility of multiple voting due to the use of temporary ink.
