One cleared, one under scrutiny, one rejected

Of the two National Citizen Party (NCP) candidates for reserved women's seats in the 13th National Parliament, the nomination of Dr Mahmuda Mitu was declared valid, while the nomination of Monira Sharmin came under scrutiny, with the Election Commission deferring a decision over legal and procedural complications.

Meanwhile, NCP's backup candidate Nusrat Tabassum's nomination was cancelled due to delayed submission.

Returning Officer Moin Uddin Khan made the decision at the Election Bhaban auditorium on Wednesday while scrutinising nomination papers submitted under the Jamaat-NCP led 11-party alliance. According to official records, 12 out of the 13 nomination papers, 12 were declared valid including Dr Mahmuda Mitu, while the decision on Monira Sharmin's nomination was deferred.

Officials said Monira Sharmin declared salary income under the government pay scale in her nomination documents. However, the Returning Officer found the submission incomplete as it lacked specific details regarding her employment history, including the organisation and period of service. The scrutiny was therefore, deferred until noon on Thursday, April 23.

Moin Uddin Khan instructed the candidate to submit the required documents within the stipulated time, saying, "You will submit the documents by 12:00 noon tomorrow. A decision will be made after that."

Under the People's Representation Order, candidates are ineligible to contest elections if less than three years have elapsed since resignation or retirement from government service. In Monira Sharmin's case, she joined Bangladesh Krishi Bank on November 11, 2023 and resigned in 2025 after entering politics. 

This has raised serious questions over her eligibility under the statutory bar, leaving little prospect of her nomination being restored.

While official confirmation of her position was not immediately available, several NCP leaders said that she had resigned from Bangladesh Krishi Bank before her appointment became permanent, arguing that the three-year restriction should not apply in her case.