The 11th parliamentary elections have just concluded, where the voters have been given the privilege of choosing the candidate of their own choice.
This year’s elections witnessed participation of the largest number of political parties. The nomination process, which is the primary phase of selecting the future policy-makers, had been marked by an unprecedented number of aspirants, and the political parties experienced the highest number of nominations rejected by the Election Commission for numerous causes.
In such a vicious electoral race, political parties had to negotiate among a record number of candidates from within the party, and not necessarily always following a democratic process. It is evident from media reports that such practices of selecting the party candidates triggered inter and intra-party violence, including allegations of bribing the central leaders.
Starting from the nomination process, throughout the elections, it is upon the Electoral Enquiry Committee (EEC), formed following the Article 91(A) of the Representation of People’s Order, to intervene during any electoral disputes or allegation.
Following the RPO: The committee shall, on the basis of information received by it, or complaints made to it, or on its own initiative, inquire into any matter or situation which in its view may constitute an offense under this order, or [any pre-poll irregularity including any situation or matter which, in its opinion, may involve], by any person whosoever, as act or omission constituting intimidation, obstruction, coercion, or the publication of false information, or any other act or omission intended to or actually resulting in the obstruction or frustration of the preparation for, or the conduct of, free and fair election in accordance with this order and the rules.”
To keep the committee effectively functional, the process must ensure that government machinery and resources, and law enforcement agencies, are acting impartially. Most importantly, the judiciary must be free to perform impartially and effectively while resolving any electoral dispute.
In a democratic system, elections carry the utmost importance in setting pro-people governments, and to ensure that it is important to examine whether the voters are freely exercising their right to franchise, are adequately informed to do so, and have confidence that the electoral process will accurately reflect their choices.
This has a direct correlation with good governance, which shapes the policy frameworks conducive to social justice and responsible use of political power and public resources by the state authorities. This calls for capable public management, assuring that policy-makers and the administration grant civil society and the private sector scope for meaningful participation.
They need to ensure the availability of information, and provide transparency. And they need to guarantee public accountability -- both internal and external -- of their actions. The rule of law and justice, especially concerning the principle of equality before the law, must be guaranteed. There can be no pro-people governance mechanism without abiding by basic democratic principles and human rights; indeed, democracy and political participation, which goes with it, are what generate “good” governance in the first place.
Bangladesh is entering the era of being a middle-income economy, which requires efficient public representation along with efficient bureaucracy to meet the vision of becoming a developed country by 2040. Unfortunately, though, the country is still building a modern administration to participate in global negotiations in meeting the targets set out through its political vision.
The political appointments and affiliations of the bureaucrats with particular parties sealed the fate of those decisions, making them foregone conclusions.
It is inevitable that the public officials under the spotlight would not and could not rise above partisanship, which has a critical impact on governance, especially to ensure neutral management of elections.
Following the standard principle of credible elections, it is unconditional that public servants of every cluster -- administrators, judicial officers, and law enforcers -- should act in a neutral and non-partisan manner, which has already been established in most developed countries.
Such an attitude is essential in building confidence among the general voters to turn out at large for exercising their right to franchise.
Enthusiasm that had already been created among the voters through the participation of large number of candidates and parties in the elections can only be possible to retain through the statutory requirement of the non-political status of the electoral administration, who are accountable to act free from political pressure, which lays the foundation of bureaucratic neutrality.
It is the application of laws that prevent or at least drastically reduce the scope of discretionary powers of politicians to dictate the electoral performance arbitrarily.
It provides the electoral officials the environment to conduct business transparently following rule-based electoral norms and procedures.
Politicians are the masters, and bureaucracy must be subservient to a political government, but there must be a limit to the degree of interference by the latter. Political leaders must spell out what they expect from the bureaucracy and must not interfere in areas beyond their jurisdiction. And to achieve this, it is inevitable to ensure participation of efficient and learned individuals in mainstream politics.
Voters in our country experienced neutral behaviour during the short tenure of the caretaker government while conducting three parliamentary elections. But unfortunately, the behaviour of the same group of people changes dramatically at the time of political governments. There are several countries with the dubious distinction of corruption, lack of democracy, and frequent changes of government.
But the bureaucracy in most of those countries more or less remains stable, because the civil administration functions under its own chain of command. We have almost similar rules and regulations, but these are not followed because of frequent interference by political actors.
Political parties have immense responsibilities to ensure efficient leadership, but the recent competition for obtaining the party tickets among the potential leaders of all the leading political parties disfigure civic expectations at large.
The loss of legitimacy of traditional political parties and disengagement from traditional forms of politics may further dent people’s confidence in the political parties and leaders, which might encourage anti-democratic forces disrupting the accelerated nature of the nation’s current development.
Sadrul Hasan Mazumder is a Policy Activist and can be reached at [email protected].
