& 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

Increasing violence, better results

Tofail Ahmed
ONE has to look at the difference between a national election and local election. In a national election the EC according to its constitutional mandate has the ability to declare election schedule independently, whereas in a local election the schedule is declared by the EC as per the government's instruction. The recently concluded HZ election was carried out as per government's decision within a month of a highly controversial 10th Parliamentary election. It's not clear why HZ elections had to be divided into five phases. I also don't know if the decision was taken by the government or the EC.
If it was a government decision then we need to clarify if the EC had analysed the strengths and weaknesses of carrying out the election in phases before it started. Similarly, if the decision was taken by the EC then it should explain the rationale behind holding the HZ elections in phases.
We know that it was prolonged so that the law enforcing agencies along with other wings of the administration could concentrate fully on conducting the election. Also the logistics management would become easier. But in reality we saw that this method didn't work and after the 3rd phase it literally collapsed.
The first phase had an overall acceptability and the outcomes reflected the voice of the voters. Opposition BNP was in the driving seat. Result started to differ when AL won in 37, BNP in some 26 out of 81 seats in the third phase.
Frequent occurrence of violence and deaths began with the third stage. There seems to be a positive corelation between AL's better results and violence. So it clearly indicates that if the government wants then it can manipulate elections by unfair means. I would say that the supporters of the ruling party carried out irregular practices in a few of the targeted HZs.
Administration in this regard was supportive through its conspicuous silence.
Vote rigging and electoral fraud in Bangladesh have chequered history. Types, dimensions and degree vary depending on time, space and support from local administration and central leadership. This time rigging was more or less peaceful, but one-sided with tacit backing of law enforcers and local election officials. In the past it wasn't as sophisticated as now. We saw how ballot boxes were prepared with sealed ballot papers night before the election day. Many voters claimed that their votes were cast without their knowledge.
Dr.Kalimullah said that in some of the centres the voters' thumbs were inked but they were not allowed to cast their votes. In some centres voters turned up to cast their votes but ballot boxes and even papers were not available as all of them were already filled.
In short, irregularities of all types kept increasing from the 3rd phase onwards.
HZ elections have not been a totally unacceptable one. The first three phases were satisfactory. Considering the violence riddled last three phases, you cannot label those as unfair since corruption and irregularities prevailed only in some centres. According to media reports around 30 HZs had major problems and gross irregularities. Violence and irregularities in the rest did not cross the tolerable limit.
Elections have so far been completed in 457 HZs. Based on media reports and professional observers, constituencies where irregularities took place can be clearly identified. The EC should take special measures to correct those. If it intends to reeastablish its credibility, it can order judicial inquiry in those HZs. On the basis of inquiry reports it can even cancel a few of the unofficially published election results. Repoll may be ordered in those HZs. The candidates who have a complaint against the polls should officially lodge the complaint with evidence. They should also be pre-
pared to go to the election tribunal and courts in due process to establish rule of law. Only boycotting and issuing press statement but silently accepting unjust treatment is also not appreciated.
The people in general have lost their trust in the EC and this trust needs to be regained. Any commissioner is dispensible but as a constitutional body the EC's dignity has to be kept high. People want to see the EC in its proper constitutional stature, not as the servant of any government.
The newly elected chairmen and vice-chairmen are reasonably qualified, politically experienced and have been local leaders for a long time. Majority of the candidates have at least HSC level certificate. A few of them have been facing court cases, which does not disqualify them.
The fourth HZ elections definitely needed to be held for the continuation of upazila parishads as constitutionally mandated local government institutions.We hope the elected leaders will perform well during their 5 year term. The government should follow a neutral policy in treating the upazila parishads.
The government has shown political wisdom, strategic intelligence and organizational maturity in handling the serious issues, but could not demonstrate its sincere commitment for democracy and good governance. It can begin with the HZ and gradually extend to reorganization of zila parishad and the Dhaka City Corporations.
It is being heard that the HZs are going to be strengthed through transfer of funds along with the functionaries. Moreover, the elected leaders are also likely to get training on administrative and other local issues. If the government wants, the HZ elected leaders can become instrumental in ensuring good governance at the local level and having positive impact in organizing pro-democracy movement from the grassroots.
The writer is an eminent local government specialist.