News Analysis: 2 local govt polls, 2 varying pictures

Two local government bodies' elections held within seven days offered starkly distinctive features. One raised high hopes for good elections and the other frustrated with electoral irregularities. 

A week ago Narayanganj City Corporation polls set a stellar example of good election. The run up to the election was peaceful. Mayor candidates nominated by the Awami League and the BNP set an example of clean electioneering by abiding by the electoral code of conduct. They also refrained from mudsling, a common phenomenon in the country's politics.

The overall peaceful atmosphere raised people's expectation for good elections. The NCC polls were also portrayed as a model election against the backdrop of severe damage to the electoral system done in the last three years by unbridled electoral irregularities. Political analysts and politicians hoped that the mode of NCC polls would have an impact on other elections, particularly the next parliamentary polls.  

But the high hopes were dashed in the zila parishad elections held less than a week later.

Unlike the NCC polls, the zila parishad election could not flicker any hope for a change in the pervasive electoral culture. Its election process began alongside the NCC polls, but the clean campaign in Narayanganj did not have any impact on zila parishad electioneering.

While candidates in small town of Narayanganj were setting good examples in their electioneering, a complete opposite picture was seen in the countrywide zila parishad elections. 

In the run up to the zila parishad election, some ruling AL MPs meddled in the polls process by taking part in campaigns of their preferred candidates. In so doing the lawmakers did not hesitate to violate the electoral code of conduct. They               did this so that they could keep dominating the local politics by ensuring victory of their preferred candidates, who are also local leaders of the AL.

The Election Commission was unable to prevent MPs from participating in campaigning. The situation forced the EC to seek the Speaker's intervention. Two days before the polls, it wrote to the Speaker with a request to take steps so that MPs do not stay in their constituencies and influence the polls further. But some lawmakers stayed in their constituencies, paying no heed to the call. 

Another negative aspect of the zila parishad polls was the alleged use of black money and chairman aspirants' distribution of “gifts” among voters. Those who allegedly did this belong to AL and they bribed people who also belong to AL. 

In the absence of the BNP in the race, the polls appeared as an in-house fight between grassroots AL leaders. The BNP leaders did not step into the battle of ballots as the party does not have adequate number of electorates to win any chairman post.

Elected representatives of other local government bodies -- city corporations, municipalities, upazilas and union parishads -- are the electorates. And almost all of them belong to the ruling AL camp as they managed to win most of the posts in those local bodies in the elections held in the last three years. 

The AL supported candidates were supposed to easily capture most of the chairman posts. But party's dissidents who contested the polls in more than 30 districts, defying the high command's decision, made the election competitive.

The AL high command tried defuse the rebels but failed. This exposed the fragile state of the chain of command in the party which resulted in the defeats of party backed 11 chairmen candidates.

However, 21 AL leaders were elected chairman uncontested. Unopposed wins got new dimension in two districts -- Feni and Jhalakathi -- where two chairmen and all 40 members were elected uncontested.

This fell in line with the unhealthy trend of uncontested elections in the last three years, since the January 2014 parliamentary election which witnessed 153 out of 300 MPs elected unopposed, a record.   

Alongside unhealthy practices, like violation of code of conduct by MPs and use of money by candidates to bribe voters, intense rivalries among ruling party men triggered a fear of violence on election day.

Police and members of Border Guard Bangladesh were deployed in at least 25 districts to maintain law and order. It appeared unique as those who were voters were locally important people and most of them belong to the ruling AL and there was no other opponent political parties competitively contesting the polls.

Deployment of 45,000 members of the law enforcers to ensure security of around 60,000 voters in zila parishad elections was unprecedented. The number of law enforcers was four times higher than the number of security men deployed in the NCC polls in which around 5 lakh voters were entitled to cast their votes.

In Narayanganj, the AL had archrival BNP to deal with. There was fear of violence as the two archrivals faced off in the prestigious electoral race. Yet free, fair and peaceful election was possible as the ruling party did not interfere in the polls. The non-interference paved the way for the law enforcers and the civil administration to ensure peaceful atmosphere during the entire election process.

The situation was different in zila parishad polls. The AL was left alone in the race as the BNP and Jatiya Party boycotted the polls. Yet, the election was not free from th4e meddling of some MPs and ministers. Due to the interference, the administration engaged in election duties was unable to check ruling party men bribing voters.

The unprecedented security measures could not make the polls entirely peaceful. There was violence  in four districts on election day. None but the ruling party men were involved.

The EC that was able to conduct the NCC polls in a free, fair and peaceful manner but could not deliver what the people expected in the zila parishad polls.

And at the end of the day, the maiden zila parishad election got tainted, dealing a big blow to the people's expectations for good elections.

The ruling AL, the government and the EC now need to walk extra-miles to restore people's confidence in future elections.