Dr. Badiul Alam Majumdar is a member of the National Consensus Commission. He also served as the head of the Electoral Reform Commission. He is the founding secretary of Citizens for Good Governance (SHUJAN). He is an economist, development activist, political analyst, and an expert in local government and electoral affairs. In the past, he held the position of Global Vice President and Country Director of ‘The Hunger Project.’ In an interview with Bonik Barta, he spoke about his experience with the reform commission, preparations for the upcoming elections, and various aspects of the current political landscape. Interview by Sabrina Shorna.

As the head of the Electoral Reform Commission, you played a leading role. To begin with, how satisfied are you with the commission’s overall work?

I’m satisfied. There were eight of us on the Electoral Reform Commission. All of us worked hard for three months. As a senior citizen of this country, I’ve been involved in many important tasks throughout my life. But working with this commission was the biggest assignment of my life. Because very few people ever get the chance to help refine a nation’s electoral system and make the path toward democratic transition smoother. That’s why we considered this responsibility to be extremely important.

The commission included both senior and younger members. We worked together, combining the experience of elders and the energy of youth. We worked tirelessly. We consulted people from various walks of life across the country and gathered input from stakeholders. I hope the recommendations we made based on their feedback, if implemented, the election system will become more refined and transparent. And that will open the way for our democratic transition.

Many of the recommendations have sparked a range of differing opinions. In this context, how likely do you think it is that these recommendations will be implemented?

We are confident that many of the recommendations will be implemented. We made several hundred recommendations. These can be broadly divided into two categories. Some recommendations can be implemented by the government through ordinances or executive orders. These won’t require constitutional amendments or the opinions of political parties. We believe political parties won’t oppose these particular recommendations.

A list of these recommendations, along with a draft ordinance, has already been submitted to the government. Their implementation now rests with the government. Most of the proposals can be executed through legislation or administrative decisions. And implementing these is essential to ensure free and fair elections, to make the Election Commission stronger, more effective, and truly independent, and to ensure its accountability. These are all critical for improving the electoral process, so it’s vital that they are put into action. We hope the government will act swiftly on this.

In the spreadsheet prepared by the Consensus Commission, there are 166 total recommendations, including 27 specific to Election Commission reform. A few of them would require constitutional amendments. Most of these are sensitive and would need political consensus. However, political parties are largely in agreement on many of these recommendations in principle.

For example, many have agreed on an upper house in Parliament and to raise the number of reserved seats for women to 100. Many also support the idea of holding direct elections for women’s seats. Some have agreed to limiting the term of the Prime Minister. Others have supported the idea that a Prime Minister should not hold multiple positions at once. In many of these areas, we’ve seen political consensus.

Not only that, there’s also broad agreement on democratizing political parties, increasing financial transparency, and ensuring accountability within political parties. We hope that in the next phase of dialogue, consensus will be reached on almost all key issues.

You held discussions with various political parties and alliances. Have there been any developments regarding the proposals or recommendations that faced disagreement or criticism during those talks?

We sent 166 recommendations to the political parties. Almost all parties have shared their views on them. Through this process, we tried to understand which recommendations they agreed with, disagreed with, or partially agreed with. The ones they agreed with require no further discussion. For those where there was disagreement or partial agreement, we discussed why they disagreed or partially agreed and explained the rationale behind our recommendations.

Following these discussions, many parties changed their positions and agreed with the proposals. In other cases, they said they would consult other leaders in their parties and get back to us. This was the first phase of our work. Now we’ve moved on to the second phase.

For the issues where there’s already broad consensus, there’s no need for further discussion. We are now focusing on those areas where consensus hasn’t yet been reached. In this second phase, we are holding discussions to try and build that consensus.

Political party leaders and activists are not just citizens of this country—they are patriotic citizens. They too want to see changes in the country’s electoral system, the constitution, and the institutions. They don’t want to see the reemergence of fascism. When Sheikh Hasina came to power, she did so through an election. She didn’t seize power. But there are questions about that election. Over time, Sheikh Hasina became a dictator.

The existing institutions, legal frameworks, and policy systems have enabled her to become a dictator. She further amended the laws, enacted several repressive laws, and abolished the caretaker government system by scrapping the 13th amendment to the constitution. These steps ensured her transformation from an authoritarian ruler into something even more oppressive.

We will also focus on reforming the repressive legal frameworks created by Sheikh Hasina. We will not only seek policy-level consensus, but also try to build consensus on how elections should be held, how these reforms should be implemented, and through what process and mechanisms. From this effort, a national charter will be created with signatures from all parties. We hope that this national charter will be finalized in July and signed by all political parties. They will decide how it will be implemented.

We’ve seen that in the past three elections, the administration had overwhelming influence. What kind of proposals have been made to overcome the obstacles the Election Commission faced in holding a free and fair election, free from administrative interference?

Among many proposals, one of the key recommendations is to make the Election Commission independent and neutral. If the Election Commission is independent, not biased, and not loyal to any political party, then they will appoint people to electoral responsibilities who themselves will not be biased or loyal. We recommended that the commission appoint returning officers from within their own officials.

Another major barrier to fair elections is the ruling government during the election period. If a partisan government remains in power during elections, even a strong Election Commission cannot operate independently. To overcome this, we proposed reinstating the caretaker government system. I personally filed a legal case challenging the 15th Amendment in court to bring back this system. We are hopeful that the caretaker government system will be restored soon. If there’s a non-partisan government during elections, they will be able to ensure that the administration and law enforcement agencies remain neutral.

Additionally, we proposed measures to ensure the accountability of the Election Commission. In the past, our election commissions conducted unfair and fraudulent elections while taking an oath to uphold their duties. Yet, no action was taken against those responsible. That’s why we recommended taking action against wrongdoers. Within 48 hours of the election, the commission must certify whether the election was fair before publishing the gazette. If it wasn’t fair, they will take appropriate action.

Another area where the Election Commission’s accountability needs to be ensured is when they are no longer in office. If any complaint arises then, no action can be taken. In that case, a parliamentary committee will be formed to investigate the complaint. The investigation report will be sent to the President with recommendations for necessary action.

Overall, several steps need to be taken to strengthen the Election Commission. Especially, we proposed forming a search committee to ensure the appointment of commission members is based on political consensus. As an alternative, we also recommended that the appointment of commission members be done through a National Constitutional Council (NCC) comprising high-level officials from the three organs of the state—such as the President or their representative, the Prime Minister, the Speaker, and the Chief Justice or their representative. Through this, a new political culture will emerge in our country—one that seeks solutions through dialogue instead of agitation on the streets.

Additionally, we proposed that if complaints are made against the Election Commission, a parliamentary committee in the upper house should be formed to investigate. The committee will submit its findings and recommendations to the President for legal action. We also suggested introducing special protection measures for commission members so that they can work independently and free from external pressure. If these initiatives are implemented, the Election Commission will become stronger and better able to ensure a fair electoral environment.

Some political parties have alleged that the current Election Commission was formed under the legal framework of the fascist Sheikh Hasina regime. What is your response to this?

It’s true that the members of the current Election Commission were appointed under the legal framework created during the previous government in 2022. We, too, were vocal about the limitations of that law. However, the search committee that was formed to appoint the current Election Commission was a neutral one. That gives us hope that the current commission will be able to carry out its duties fairly. Still, only time will tell how independently they are actually able to function.

What is the earliest possible time the existing Election Commission could organize a national election? And how capable is the current government in this regard?

The current interim government is essentially a non-partisan government. Historically, all the fair elections in this country were held under non-partisan governments. This government has also made a commitment to hold a fair election. We hope they will succeed in doing so.

But will holding a fair election alone be enough to prevent the return of authoritarian rule or to open the path for democratic practice?

Our recommendations are not limited to cleaning up the electoral process. The political landscape itself is highly polluted. So we’ve also made recommendations to improve the overall political environment. And it’s important to understand that fair elections alone do not guarantee democratic governance. Let’s not forget that Sheikh Hasina also came to power through an election. Eventually, she became an authoritarian ruler.

So to truly restore democratic practice, legal, administrative, and structural reforms are necessary. That’s why we proposed limiting the tenure of the Prime Minister and establishing a balance of power between the President and the Prime Minister. We also made recommendations regarding the process of appointing the President. If these recommendations are implemented, not only will it be possible to hold fair elections, but we believe it will also open the way for democratic transition.

What proposals have you made for reforming the political party registration process in the future?

We’ve made several far-reaching recommendations regarding the registration of political parties. First, we’ve proposed democratizing political parties. For example, party leaders at every level should be elected through secret ballots by the party’s members.

Many parties have complained that the current registration process is complex and expensive. For instance, parties are required to maintain offices in multiple districts and sub-districts, which is a major challenge for many. We’ve made recommendations to address those issues as well.

Regarding transparency and qualifications, we proposed that the names of party members should be made public and that every party’s member list should be updated annually on their website.

Steps will be taken to ensure that criminals or thugs cannot become members of political parties. Parties will be required to disclose their sources of income and expenses. Their annual financial reports, donor contributions, and other transactions will be audited regularly. Likewise, candidates’ election expenditure affidavits will be verified to ensure transparency.

We also recommended that student and teacher organizations should not be directly involved in Election Commission activities. This is to prevent the rise of tail-end political influence. Internal elections within political parties should also be held through secret ballots.

If these recommendations are adopted and implemented, we believe the political arena will become much cleaner.

What comes next?

Discussions are ongoing with the political parties. While there is consensus on many issues, fundamental disagreements still remain on several key points. We are optimistic that consensus can be reached on many of these fundamental issues as well. We are even more hopeful that by July, a ‘National Charter’ can be signed. Through this, we will be able to properly honor the sacrifices of Abu Sayed, Mugdho, and others.

[This interview was originally conducted in Bangla and published in both the Print and Online editions of Bonik Barta. It has since been translated for the English edition.]