Rebuilding trust as Bangladesh charts its path to crucial elections

Bangladesh has held 12 national parliamentary elections since independence, and we are now approaching the 13th. While the continuity might suggest stability, the reality is far more complex. Not all of our elections have been fair, credible, or widely accepted. Many have been questioned, and the reasons are familiar: politics has often undermined elections, pulling them toward particular interests and manipulating outcomes in favour of those in power.

Our electoral history is a series of missed opportunities. One such moment came in 1991, when all major political parties agreed that future elections would be held under a neutral caretaker government. This agreement recognized a fundamental truth: credible elections require impartial oversight. Yet the consensus did not endure. Divisions re-emerged, controversies followed, and subsequent elections were surrounded by criticism.

The 2014 election, for example, is widely described internationally as a failed election. Domestically, we sometimes refer to it as uncontested, but the reality remains: it lacked legitimacy. In 2018, we witnessed what has been called the "night-time vote," where voting occurred under questionable circumstances and public access to polling stations was limited. In 2024, we observed yet another variation: no seats were uncontested, yet the process functioned largely as a staged or "dummy" election.

These recurring patterns illustrate a system struggling to find firm ground. Many argue that Bangladesh's electoral system has effectively collapsed. We are, in essence, standing on its ruins.

Institutional weaknesses: the core problem

The primary issue is not whether the next election will be fair. The critical question is whether we can build a strong institutional foundation for electoral democracy. Despite decades of national and local elections, Bangladesh has not been able to establish enduring electoral institutions. This is our greatest failure.

Even if the upcoming election is praised as free and fair, it will not automatically institutionalize the system. History shows this clearly. The 1991 election was widely celebrated as credible, yet it did not create a lasting framework for electoral integrity. A single election cannot establish an institution.

Global scrutiny will be intense in 2026, with national elections, a referendum, and local elections all occurring in close succession. The world will be watching whether Bangladesh can finally move beyond staged or flawed elections toward genuine democratic consolidation.

This challenge is compounded by the broader electoral cycle. Following national elections, Bangladesh conducts numerous local government elections—city corporations, upazila parishads, municipalities, and union councils. These elections are organized under an elected national government, meaning the ruling party inevitably has oversight. The political culture, historically, suggests that incumbents are reluctant to allow fair competition. There remains a deeply entrenched belief that once in power, the electoral field belongs to those who hold office. Whether this mindset has changed is unclear.

Political culture and missed opportunities

Bangladesh itself was born out of an election-centred political crisis. The 1970 election was free, fair, and uncontested, becoming a turning point that led to independence. Yet successive governments have failed to preserve this legacy.

After the 1991 election, the BNP had an unprecedented opportunity. I advised colleagues at the time that proper governance could have secured their political dominance for the next 10–15 years. They failed to seize that moment. Similarly, after the 2008 election, which was generally accepted as credible, the Awami League had an opportunity to institutionalize democratic gains but instead relied on questionable tactics to maintain power.

Political parties must learn from these lessons. Internal democracy and financial transparency are central. Democracy cannot be ensured externally if it does not exist within parties themselves. Without transparent, competitive processes for candidate nomination, political parties cannot credibly claim to advance democracy nationwide.

The commercialisation of politics

Today, politics is heavily commercialized. Nomination trading continues, and elections are increasingly driven by money and muscle power. Winning without substantial resources has become nearly impossible. This dynamic affects both national and local elections, perpetuating a cycle where political office is accessible primarily to the wealthy and well-connected rather than the capable or committed.

Violence has also become entrenched in electoral politics. During the anti-Ershad movement from 1983 to 1990, there were on average 17 hartal days per year. Between 1991 and 2013, that number rose to 46 days per year. Money and power fuel this violence, creating a vicious cycle that further destabilizes the electoral system.

The importance of enforcement

Many assume that Bangladesh's electoral laws are weak. In reality, the legal framework is comparatively strong, even stronger than in some neighboring countries. The problem lies not in law-making but in law enforcement. India, for instance, conducts more credible elections not because its laws are superior, but because they are enforced. In Bangladesh, enforcement is inconsistent, and political will is often absent.

Some reforms have been implemented, such as the 2022 law on appointing election commissioners, but their neutrality is questionable. Laws alone are insufficient; they must be applied sincerely and consistently. Enforcement mechanisms, post-election auditing, and monitoring of campaign expenditures are essential. Without these measures, even the strongest legal framework is meaningless.

Lessons from other countries

Other democracies offer instructive examples. Indonesia, once struggling with weak electoral processes, gradually improved its system over two decades. Political parties strengthened their relationships, legal frameworks were revised, and enforcement became consistent. Today, Indonesia's election indices are far higher than they were twenty years ago. The key factor was political will combined with persistent citizen engagement.

Bangladesh can achieve similar results, but it requires commitment from political leaders and active involvement from civil society. Citizens must claim their rights, demand accountability, and insist on fair practices. Moments like the July movement demonstrated the power of public engagement, but history shows we often forget lessons too quickly.

Enforcing existing laws must be our priority. The legal framework is capable of supporting credible elections, but it requires robust oversight, monitoring of campaign finance, and independent auditing. The next government has a critical responsibility to implement these reforms effectively. Constitutional amendments may be necessary in some areas, but much can be achieved through diligent enforcement of existing provisions.

Global scrutiny will be intense in 2026, with national elections, a referendum, and local elections all occurring in close succession. The world will be watching whether Bangladesh can finally move beyond staged or flawed elections toward genuine democratic consolidation.

The path ahead is challenging, but Bangladesh does have a future. Real change will depend on political will, the integrity of institutions, and the sustained engagement of citizens. Only by addressing internal party democracy, enforcing laws rigorously, and breaking the vicious cycles of money and violence can we hope to transform our electoral system into one worthy of international and domestic confidence.

The lessons are clear. History offers both caution and hope. We have experienced flawed elections and missed opportunities, but change is possible if it is pursued with sincerity, courage, and consistency. The future of Bangladesh's democracy depends on whether we can learn from the past and commit to institutionalizing fairness, transparency, and accountability at every level of the electoral process.

Dr Md Abdul Alim, Member of Former Election System Reform Commission. Sketch: TBS

Abridged from an interview on 'TBS Future' hosted by TBS Executive Editor Shakawat Liton