I think there are many reasons to consider both the parties, Awami League, as bad. While doing some good work, both parties have resorted to varying degrees of corruption, human rights violations, abuse of power, election rigging and other misdeeds when in power. That is why some people in the civil society may find BNP worse and some may find Awami League worse.
However, I believe that such subjective thinking should not be allowed to undermine the issue-based or objective movement of civil society. The main focus should be on the notions of right and wrong, not on who gets to hold these notions.
For example, if we believe in the people's right to vote, we will stand against any power under whose rule there are rigged elections. Civil society that believes in democracy should not consider who will come to power if fair voting takes place, BNP or Awami League. Their consideration should be whether the franchise of the people has been preserved or not.
Even though some of them believe that the party which is 'worse' in their eyes will come to power if voting rights are upheld, they still need to understand people's voting rights and their Must maintain full respect. After all, it is the people's right to vote that is the fundamental basis of the 1972 Constitution of Bangladesh, the spirit of the liberation struggle and all global and national human rights conventions.
Similarly, if we believe in the 1972 Constitution, if we consider ourselves human rights activists, we must oppose all oppression, tyranny and injustice. The issue to be considered here is the question of violation of human rights. When we protest, we are unable to consider whether the victim or the perpetrator is of our choice or not. If there is corruption in the country then we should openly criticize the people in power. Such criticism cannot serve as a factor in whether we like the family of the ruling party or dislike the family of the other party. We often do not pay attention to this.