Upazila Parishad elections: Government's controversy and opposition's boycott

Upazila Parishad elections: Government's controversy and opposition's boycott

1 minute, 27 seconds Read

If the rules for conducting elections with party nominations and symbols had been in place, then undoubtedly the Awami League would have had to field 'dummy' candidates again like in the January 7 elections, or arrangements would have been made for the candidates to win most of the seats unopposed. .

It is also very clear that he expected that more BNP leaders and workers would have participated in the elections had it not been for the party symbol issue. But despite all kinds of troubles, BNP took a tough stance on rejecting the upazila elections and expelled more than a hundred leaders and workers.

Between the boycott of BNP and other opposition parties and the absence of voters in the first phase of upazila elections, two factors are extremely important. First, the Commission and the government persisted in their efforts to portray the elections as fair and competitive. The Election Commission went so far as to issue a letter to the Speaker asking him to ensure that ministers and Members of Parliament do not participate in this election, which they did not do in the case of the municipal corporation elections. In other words, the Election Commission itself proved that although it had the ways and means to prevent abuse of power, it did not always implement that power.

This time he sought assistance from the Speaker to reduce the influence of ministers and MPs to fulfill the wishes of the ruling party. Then the question arises whether the Speaker has any effective authority in this regard? Only after the top echelons of the ruling party issued instructions to relatives of ministers and MPs to withdraw their candidatures did the Election Commission begin its attack against ministers and Members of Parliament who wield influence.

1027 Total Views 2 Views Today
Spread the love

Similar Posts