& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Election Commission Must Not Validate the Results

ON THE RECORD

by Shah AMS Kibria
XT T AS ‘h® so-called \ A Aloction held an 15
VV February free and fan? uid it meet the requirements of the law? The nation would demand a straight forward answer from the Chief Election Commissioner He owes It to the nation. He must not evade his responsibility, as he has often done, by equivocation and sophistry. .If his honest answer is that it was neither free nor fair then he is dutybound to reject the results. He would be guilty of serious de-reliction of duty if he validates the results of flawed elections in the face of irrefutable evide-nce that widespread rigging took place.
The -Chief Election Com-misaioner has been very preoccupied with the task of upholding the constitution. He seeins to forget that his main, and indeed only, re sponsibillty is to hold elections. It is also his responsibility to ensure that the elections are free and fair. He certainly holds an office under the constitution but he is not the exclusive guar-dian of the constitution. Nowhere Is it written in the constitution that the Election Commission has to guarantee the continuity of the government or act as its guardian. The Election Commission's sole task is to hold elections which are free, fair and lawful. In fulfilling this specific responsibil
ity'. the constitution directs that the "The Election Commission shall be independent in the exercise of its functions and subject only to this, constitution and any other law." The point about independence is obviously most important because grave doubts have . arisen in the mind of the people about the independence of the Election Commission. The manner in which it postponed the date of the by-elections to the seats vacated by the opposition MPs to gave rise to doubts in public mind about how Independent the EC has been from government influence. Whatever may be the arguments advanced by Mr. Justice Sadeque, the postponement was designed to. or ended up prolonging the life of the BNP government. His action may once again act as the instrument of a government which Is determined to hang on to office on the strength of an election which was flawed from be-ginning to end? Mr. Justice Sadeque has a choice. He can declare that the elections failed to meet the minimum acceptable standards under the law. Or he can. of course, do what he has been doing so far by validating results which are fatally flawed. In doing so
he will go down in history as a key collaborator tn the process of validating a flawed election whose credibility, and as such, acceptability is almost next o zero.
Most Jurists I have talked to have said that the Chief Election Commissioner and other Commissioners are not above the law. It cannot be as if they are not accountable to anyone. If they are found to be flouting the law the matter
can be referred to the Supreme Judicial Council for Its consideration.
Why am I urging upon the Chief Election Commissioner and his colleagues to refrain from legalizing a process which failed to meet the requirements of law? It is because the evidence is so strong. Reports from FEMA confirm that rigging on a massive scale has robbed the process of any semblance of
legality FEMA s interim report released yesterday noted that. The term free and fair is not applicable to this election” Numerous irregularities were noted most importantly. the absence of polling officials and polling agents in many centres, and the failure to apply indelible ink which enabled some voters to cast ballots more than once which was reflected in discrepancies between the number of
voters present and the declared restilts.
In a very large number of cases the presiding officers and polling officers were Just not there. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that in a particular constituency these officers may have been present, say, in fifty per cent of the centres. BNP musclemen took possession of the other fifty per cent of centres and put the seal on the ballot
paper and stuffed the ballot boxes. Can he. In all honesty, treat the results of this fraudulent exercise as legally valid? I am told that the Election Commission has ordered fresh polls in 84 seats. Do they want the na-tion to believe that in the rest of the constituencies the necessary legal safeguards against fraud and rigring operated? The EC is reportedly trying to examine only those cases where the number of votes exceed all reasonable limit. Is this either a sensible or legally tenable way to determine the legal validity of polls? Some BNP candidates may have been prudent In stuffing the boxes with false votes while others were too greedy.
Let us hear what the lawyers have to say in the matter. Ten leading lawyers, including some eminent legal persona lities, issued a joint statement on February 17 calling for can cellation of the elections. They said, "If the Election Commi-ssion remains true to its oath it cannot resort to fraud in the name of election that did not reflect the will of the people." They pointed out that the Commission should know better than any one else that there was no election in fact
or in law and that there had been a total failure of the electoral process from whatever angle one might look at it. "As such the election failed to give any credibility to the Commission itself or any kind of legitimacy to any government." yA
The central issue before the nation is the sad conclusion that the party In power cannot conduct any election that can be called free and fair. Ironically, the failed attempt by the BNP to stage a fraudulent election on 15 February only proved the op-position's contention. Bangladesh is not yet ready to hold elections as it is done in the UK or France or the USA. We need to establish the political culture of free and fair election. We must build up the tradition of rigging-free polling. We must ensure that men and women of integrity and character are placed in the Election Commission to conduct the election according to the law. They must not be seen as mere pliable instruments of the ruling party.
The present Chief Election Commissioner's role has not produced this type of public confidence which is vital for that post. Let us hope that at this critical Juncture of the nation he will rise to the occasion and cancel the entire exercise held on 15 February as invalid.