When the interim government assures citizens of the national election in February next year, the issue generated great enthusiasm among people. But concerns still persist about trust, fairness and whether the outcome will hold legitimacy once ballots are counted as major political parties have not yet reached a consensus on many reform agenda including the voting systems.
This is why there has been uncertainty over the election though Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus has insisted over and over again that the parliamentary election will be held in February. His recent meetings with BNP, Jamaat-e-Islami, and the National Citizen Party (NCP) were meant to underline his pledge. Yet, the differences and contradictions among the political parties cannot be resolved by a day's meeting alone.
According to news reports, BNP emerged from the meeting largely satisfied. Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir said that though one force has been trying to delay the polls, there is no scope for its postponement. His message was meant to reassure. But it leaves questions. Who exactly is this force? Why does BNP not identify it directly? And can BNP's confidence be taken at face value, or is it simply projecting certainty in a climate of doubt?
However, Jamaat-e-Islami took a different stance. Syed Abdullah Muhammad Taher described the August 5 announcement of the February election date as premature and politically pressured, tied awkwardly to the July Declaration. His warning about a "blueprint election" is significant. Once doubts about neutrality are raised, can they be dispelled by assurances alone? What steps must the interim government take to prove that the process is not pre-arranged?
NCP focused on issues beyond scheduling. Ariful Islam Adib reminded that the scars of last year's mass uprising remain unhealed. Rehabilitation for the injured, protection for families of victims, and accountability for state agencies are yet to be ensured. Should an election proceed while these grievances remain unsettled? Or is the very credibility of the vote tied to addressing them first?
Another concern is the uncertain future of Jatiya Party. Following attacks on its office, calls have grown for banning its activities, just as Awami League has been sidelined. Jamaat and NCP pressed the Chief Adviser on this point, citing alleged collaboration between Jatiya Party and Awami League. But can an election still claim inclusiveness if multiple parties are pushed out of the field? Will restrictions strengthen democracy, or weaken it by narrowing representation?
Professor Yunus also urged parties to remain alert during Durga Puja, highlighting the importance of religious harmony in the run-up to the polls. His warning is timely, yet it also shows how fragile the situation remains.
The discussions revealed divergence rather than unity. BNP wants speed, Jamaat demands clarity, NCP insists on justice. The Chief Adviser has promised all three, but without specifics. Deadlines are important, but do they guarantee legitimacy? Without transparency, inclusiveness, and accountability, can punctual elections produce meaningful outcomes?
Bangladesh's political history is a reminder that elections held on schedule have not always been accepted as free or fair. Voter participation, the absence of intimidation, and the perception of neutrality matter more than the date itself. The interim government must ask: is it preparing for an election that is merely timely, or one that will be genuinely trusted?
To move forward, three steps seem unavoidable: address outstanding grievances from last year's uprising, clarify the rules for all political parties without selective exclusions, and show visible evidence of neutrality in the electoral process. Without these, February may come quickly but bring little change.
The Chief Adviser has said there is no alternative to holding polls in February. The real question is whether Bangladesh can hold an election that commands trust, brings stability, and ends the cycle of suspicion. If not, will the country find itself once again repeating the past?
The writer is an Editorial Assistant, The Daily Observer
