Bangladesh elections

Is Washington Turning a New Page on Bangladesh?

The apparent US inaction in Bangladesh could be read as a ‘low energy extension period’.

Before a red carpet was rolled out for Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Washington D.C. during last summer, Admiral John Kirby, coordinator for strategic communications US National Security Council (NSC), had said, “On Bangladesh, we let the Indian government speak for its bilateral relations with Bangladesh but we have already made clear our desire to see free and fair elections in Bangladesh.”

If taken out of context, the statement might sound a bit off the road, however, the US has been consistently expressing its support for democracy in Bangladesh. In fact, Bangladesh was made ‘a centerpiece of Biden administration’s effort to place democracy at the heart of the U.S foreign policy’.

The ‘dummy election’

An election, popularly dubbed as a ‘dummy election’, was held in Dhaka on January 7, 2024, where Sheikh Hasina’s party Awami League didn’t have to face any competition. The election sealed the fate of Bangladesh as a one party-ruled autocratic state. A month after the election, Hasina’s top civil servant Masud Bin Momen received a letter from President Joseph R. Biden, intended for the prime minister, expressing ‘interest to work with Bangladesh’. With the sealed letter, has the US made a 180-degree turn from its policy of ‘promoting democracy’ in Bangladesh?

The most plausible answer to that is a yes. At least lack of any tangible action after the fraudulent election is forcing some to ponder if the US has backtracked from the democracy-promotion agenda in Bangladesh. The White House letter to Hasina gives serious credence to that understanding.

The US actions

In the run up to the elections, there have been a series of statements and significant actions from the US in which the need for a free and credible elections in the South Asian country was underlined in the last two a half years.

Notably, the US actions significantly started with sanctions against the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), the notorious paramilitary forces, allegedly accused for massive human rights violations including enforced disappearances, tortures and killings. Long before the elections in Bangladesh, the US secretary of state Antony Blinken declared the US visa restrictions policy for Bangladesh nationals for ‘undermining democratic election process’.

To clarify the US visa restrictions, Assistant Secretary Bureau Of South And Central Asian Affairs Donald Lu, appeared in a TV talk show in Bangladesh. On the other hand, the State Department and NSC’s spokespersons have repeatedly reaffirmed the US position on holding a credible and participatory elections in Bangladesh.

In the meantime, Hasina’s ministers indicated that India may help them get away with the US pressure for a democratic election. Although it was assumed that Delhi would convince Washington not to be involved in India’s backyard, specially for the case of Bangladesh, Dhaka received a letter from Donal Lu, right after the two plus two dialogues in Delhi, urging the political parties to arrange dialogues for a participatory election. That letter made it plausible that the ball was on Hasina’s court to initiate processes for free and fair elections.

Perhaps the letter, with an already put in place ‘3C’ visa restrictions indicated Dhaka might face the US dissatisfaction if they denied holding free elections as understood by many. After all these, the ‘dummy election’ has ended and now Hasina, being the prime minister, has received letter of ‘interest to work together’ from President Biden.

There has been no US action, visibly, against Hasina’s government for ‘undermining democratic elections’ which certainly didn’t reflect the will of the people. Foreign policy expert Sreeradha Datta observed roughly ten percent of people showed up for the elections.

The important question

Since the US created enough buzz for holding a free election and didn’t take any action after the polls, it has created a murmur among the common readers and experienced political analysts – has the US shifted the ‘promoting democracy’ policy being influenced by India as Hasina is Delhi’s darling child.

To get a clearer view of such a genuine question, the readers might need to wait a few more months, for certain reasons.

The oxygen of policy time in Washington, nowadays, is being eaten up by the events in the middle east. Secondly, even if the US wants to go for anything that may seem to be punishing the Hasina government for undermining democracy and the US national security interests in the region, Washington needs to reassess the situation with fresh perspectives. Meanwhile, the US and all its major allies have refrained from congratulating Hasina’s questionable coronation. The same podiums of the State Department and White House briefings resonate with the same message, a call for restoring the democratic process.

On February 5, principal deputy spokesperson for the US Department of State Vedant Patel responding to a question about the ‘3C’ visa restrictions said, “These policies don’t sunset, just because the election is over.”

A fresh assessment is needed about who is holding the winning ground in Dhaka among India, China and the US.

The apparent US inaction in Bangladesh could be read as ‘low energy extension period’ as high energy is put for the middle east as well as to be extended for elections slated in the country in November.

India’s problem

Despite Washington not being able to put much policy time towards South Asia, it might be difficult to take off the paddle of the boat due to strategic priorities. The resumption of key Kyaukphyu Indian Ocean port, in the western state of Rakhine will give China competitive advantage. China has 70 per cent stake in the port, literally owning the real estate. Not too far away, the BNS Sheikh Hasina (a new naval base that has been developed for the Bangladesh Navy), operated by China, is to offer ‘secure jetty facilities for submarines and warships’.

These are of more strategic importance for China, India and the US, certainly not for Dhaka. However, lack of democracy in the country has brought an unexpected discomfort for Washington’s most trusted partner in South Asia. As Hasina’s opposition parties are introspecting for the next courses of action while tens of thousands of activists and leaders are in jail, some barely known social media characters have called for a boycott of India, copying the ‘India Out’ campaign which happened in Maldives. It is too early to assess the impact of the boycott, yet it has reached a level that external affairs minister S. Jaishankar has faced questions if India’s neighbourhood policies are failing.

Despite Delhi not sending its foreign secretary this time to Dhaka, as was done in 2014 to ensure Hasina’s victory, Indian influence was clearly evident. The common sentiment towards India among the people is not favourable for the neighbouring country. Regardless of the significant backsliding of democracy in Bangladesh, attributing India as the enabler of that decline is certainly not a public relations boost. Thus, Delhi will have to face the consequences for the action or inaction of the US or China in Dhaka.

Mushfiqul Fazal Ansarey is working as the State Department and White House Correspondent for Just News BD and South Asia Perspectives and a Fellow of Journalism Network, Inc (Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project).

Bangladesh’s Crumbling Democracy No Roadblock for Superpowers

Bangladesh’s longest-serving female Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, will extend her reign because her main opposition Bangladeshi Nationalist Party has boycotted the election.

As Bangladesh votes, the world’s major powers are seeking to exert control over what happens next, with Sheikh Hasina set to win another disputed term.

When Bangladesh goes to the polls on January 7, the great performance of democracy will take centre stage. Voting booths will be set up, voters will cast votes, and they will be counted. However, despite the show, there is no surprise twist lurking for election watchers, because the result is already known.

Sheikh Hasina will be re-elected for a fifth time, and her party, the Bangladesh Awami League (AL), will form government once again.

Bangladesh’s longest-serving female prime minister will extend her reign because her main opposition Bangladeshi Nationalist Party (BNP) has boycotted the election.

In explaining the reason behind the boycott, BNP’s acting chairman Tarique Rahman told Diplomat Magazine that “as long as Hasina retains power, every election in Bangladesh will involve extensive irregularities, making the much-anticipated level-playing field a distant dream”.

Since late October 2023, more than 20,000 opposition activists have been imprisoned. Five of these activists died in prison. Human Rights Watch termed the government’s response to the opposition as an “autocratic crackdown” ahead of the election.

Bangladesh’s agriculture minister Mohammad Abdur Razzaque told media that the government has offered freedom to the imprisoned BNP leaders in exchange for participating in the election, hinting that this crackdown was merely a bargaining chip to legitimise the election.

Reports of BNP grassroots activists spending time away from their families and homes to avoid arrests have surfaced.

A New York Times report has claimed that about one million of BNP activists are facing court cases. The number of cases filed against each opposition activist varies from dozens up to 400.

The government justifies the crackdown by claiming that opposition activists are being violent. They are setting fire to public transport and hurling crude bombs at police and officials.

The BNP accuses the government of sabotaging the opposition movement with government agents and AL party members posing as opposition to commit violent acts.

In the absence of an independent law enforcement and judiciary, it is difficult for external observers to get to the bottom of these claims and counter claims.

Against this backdrop, the rhetoric of regional and global superpowers like India, China, Russia and the US about what the opposition described as Bangladesh’s “farcical” election reveals the intriguing dynamics of the swirling geopolitics which Bangladesh is being dragged into.

India and China are supporting the Bangladeshi government in its tilt toward another term. The two regional powers who oppose each other across Asia make strange bedfellows in the Hasina camp.

Sheikh Hasina met with Xi Jinping in August, with Xi claiming China is ready to “strengthen coordination and cooperation with Bangladesh in multilateral affairs and safeguard international fairness and justice”.

China has invested heavily in Bangladesh through its Belt and Road initiative, while billions in construction contracts have been opened up for Chinese firms going the other way.

India, meanwhile, shares over 4,000 km of its land border with Bangladesh and uses Bangladeshi ports as transit to connect its north eastern frontier to other parts of the country. This was only made possible because of the Hasina government’s friendly gesture to India.

The US says it wants a free and fair election in Bangladesh and has imposed visa restrictions on what it claims are “Bangladeshi individuals responsible for, or complicit in, undermining the democratic election process.”

In an attempt to spread the blame, the statement claimed, “these individuals include members of law enforcement, the ruling party, and the political opposition.”

Russia has publicly accused the US of interfering in Bangladesh’s internal matters and claimed Washington is plotting an Arab-Spring-like post election protests in Bangladesh to overthrow Hasina’s government.

Despite Moscow’s rancour, the US remains one of Bangladesh’s most significant trading partners. The US is a major destination for Bangladesh’s billion-dollar textile exports. In addition, because of the US’s liberal visa regime, many Bangladeshi businessmen, politicians, military elites and bureaucrats are able to make new homes in the US.

US calls for a fair election come against the backdrop of two lopsided votes in 2014 and 2018. Joe Biden’s administration levied human rights sanctions against Bangladesh’s elite paramilitary force Rapid Action Battalion and several of its former officials following accusations of severe human rights violations, including hundreds of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings.

However, these relationships do not exist in a zero-sum vacuum, where every nation is looking to exert their own individual will on Bangladesh.

India and the US are perceived to be allies in the region. The hard work done on growing the relationship from Delhi to Washington has seen a closer diplomatic relationship culminate in the Quad, along with Australia and Japan, aimed almost entirely at deterring China in the region.

However, the US sits apart from the Modi government, which argues it is in its national interest that Hasina’s government continues.

India’s reasoning however could be perceived as somewhat thin under analysis.

In a recent keynote speech in Dhaka, India’s former foreign minister, M.J. Akbar claimed that superpowers want puppets who can serve their interest because Bangladesh is important geopolitically. Akbar termed Sheikh Hasina as the “liberator of democracy from dictatorship”.

In reality, all the globally accepted indicators for freedom and democracy contradict Akbar’s claim. The statement shows the general sentiment of the Indian establishment towards Bangladesh: that Hasina’s rule satisfies Indian aims regardless of the trouble for the people of Bangladesh.

Who wins and who loses may be obvious to the pundits in Dhaka, but the weight that it will put on the US and India relationship will continue long after the vote, with an “agree to disagree mentality” likely to test the burgeoning friendship.

Dr Mubashar Hasan is a postdoctoral research fellow at the Department of Culture Studies and Oriental Languages, University of Oslo, Norway. His research was funded by the Norwegian Research Council.

This article was originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™.

A One-Sided Election Risks Bangladesh’s Future

With the distinction between the state, government and party obliterated, Bangladesh is heading towards a personalised autocracy.

The January 7 Bangladesh general election is set to deliver a victory to Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League party. It might also turn out to be a watershed moment in the country’s history.

Despite some similarities with the past two elections of 2014 and 2018, the post-election scenario in 2024 is likely to be different.

Formidable challenges, both domestic and international, will stare Hasina in the face in her fourth consecutive term in office, with serious implications for the country’s economic, political and diplomatic trajectories.

The road to the 2024 election is littered with intrigue, machination, crackdown on the opposition, mass arrests, violence and misuse of the state apparatus. Even the judiciary has been mobilised to keep the main opposition political party, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, out of the contest. And yet the election is packaged as participatory.

The question is whether the voters will show up to cast their ballot. When the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) boycotted the election in 2014 there was low voter turnout, which undermined the Awami League’s (AL) claim of gaining a popular mandate. The election of more than half of the parliament members unopposed in 2014 made that claim untenable.

To avoid a repeat of 2014, this time around the AL has filed ‘dummy’ candidates — allowing its own party members to contest as ‘independents’ against the official candidates — hoping that these candidates will bring their supporters to the polling booth.

However, the Hasina government is not banking on dummy candidates alone. It has also targeted the most vulnerable segments of society with the threat of losing welfare benefits if they don’t cast their vote.

This is quite a sizeable number: 12.8 million Bangladeshis are recipients of social benefits and an additional 19.7 million receive stipends to support enrolment of primary and secondary school children.

In many places, recipients’ beneficiary ID cards have been confiscated by the local AL leaders with the promise that they will be returned after the cardholder casts their vote. Whether these tactics will bear fruit remains to be seen.

Unlike the previous elections, however, voter turnout will not tell the whole story.

Sheikh Hasina and her party are already under a moral cloud of being non-participatory. The legitimacy of Hasina’s impending victory is further undermined by several other factors such as the setting up of three ‘King’s’ Parties, the timing of the crackdown against the opposition, the failed attempt to split the BNP, the use of state machinery to cajole and coerce individuals and organisations to join the election and continued violence involving the ruling party’s supported candidates and independents.

In the past year, experts have raised questions about the constitutionality of the 15th Amendment to the Bangladesh Constitution, which repealed the caretaker government provision.

Given the multitude of factors that undermine the legitimacy of Hasina’s forthcoming victory, the 2024 election will further exacerbate the political crisis in the country.

The catchphrase of US elections since 1992 — ‘it’s the economy, stupid’ — applies to Bangladesh as well. The AL’s claim of delivering economic development at the expense of democracy has started coming apart at the seams.

Bangladesh’s economy continues to spiral towards a crisis. Foreign exchange reserves have shrunk to less than USD$20bn and are dwindling and external debt has reached almost USD$100bn with a debt servicing payment figure that will hit USD$3.56bn in the current fiscal year.

The banking sector is in disarray with non-performing loans constituting 10.11 percent of the total. The liquidity crisis has led to the risk of halting of bank transactions on several occasions. Inflation is over 9 percent according to official figures, while market price suggests a far higher rate. And the Bangladeshi currency (Taka) has depreciated about 28 percent over the past year.

In the past months the remittance flow, as well as export earnings (including from the readymade garments sector), have been declining.

These problems have led to three rating companies — S&P, Moody’s and Fitch — downgrading Bangladesh’s sovereign credit rating.

Crony capitalism, rampant corruption and a high rate of capital flight have also contributed to the economic crisis and benefited a small coterie close to the regime. These members of the civil services, police and law enforcement agencies, military and business elites, are key to the continuation of the regime.

As the economic crisis exacerbates, those milking the system of spoils will demand even more concessions for their support. The new government will neither have the political will nor the public mandate to deliver them.

The downturn in the economy is already causing serious hardships to the middle and lower-middle classes, while the poor are barely surviving. The dry tinder only needs a spark to unleash popular unrest.

There will also be a geopolitical fallout of the one-sided polls.

Bangladesh’s election has drawn international attention as the United States and the European Union have repeatedly called for a free, fair and inclusive election, while Russia, China and India have stood by Sheikh Hasina.

Russia and China have accused the US of interfering in Bangladesh’s internal affairs. Hasina has claimed that the US intends to depose her. Although the US has maintained silence since the crackdown on the opposition began and the election schedule was announced, speculation is rife that it may impose punitive measures after the election.

If the US and the Western nations, Bangladesh’s major trade partners and sources of investments, opt for a punitive policy, the economic crisis will deepen further.

This crisis could drive the new government more towards China which has the deep pockets to help the government with the goal of having more influence. Recent overtures from China send a clear signal in this regard. A combination of these factors points to a dramatic shift in Bangladesh’s foreign policy orientation.

An immediate and key issue after the election will be how the government intends to deal with the opposition, particularly the BNP. Recent statements by AL leaders suggest the option of banning the BNP. This could result in further violence and chaos.

The opposition is more likely to feel an existential threat as the space for dissent and political activism may well disappear.

Bangladesh’s post-election political scene may then soon become akin to Cambodia under Hun Sen and China under the Communist Party where only parties with cooperative relations with the incumbent can exist.

The country is heading into uncharted territory as the distinction between the state, government, and party is obliterated. The general election could well put a seal on a personalised autocracy.

Ali Riaz is a Distinguished Professor of political science at Illinois State University, a Nonresident Senior Fellow of the Atlantic Council and the President of the American Institute of Bangladesh Studies (AIBS). His recent publication is titled Pathways of autocratization: The tumultuous journey of Bangladeshi politics (Routledge, 2024).

Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™.

Amid Political Repression and Economic Crisis, Bangladesh is Set for a One-Sided Election on Jan 7

With opposition parties boycotting the election and mass arrests, Bangladesh’s turn towards a dictatorship under Sheikh Hasina is set to continue with the third consecutive one-sided election.

It is a period of economic boom and political tranquility. There are shiny new buildings, expressways, and bridges. Shopping malls abound with imported luxury brands. To be sure, there are dark spots –inequality is rising, and dissent is stifled. But these are ignored in the superficially laudatory articles in the foreign media. Meanwhile, foreign financiers lend to the country willingly.

Until, of course, things change. And they change rather quickly. All those things that were glossed over previously suddenly loom large. Turns out the country’s banks are saddled with bad loans issued to politically connected cronies and crooks. The currency tanks. Inflation soars. With peaceful democratic avenues closed, a spasm of violence ensues.

A persistent current account deficit, banking sector woes, and authoritarian politics make for a volatile cocktail that is redolent of Southeast Asia of the mid-1990s – but as things stand, they also describe a Bangladesh of the mid-2020s.

Let us consider each of these elements in turn.

Over the past decade, Bangladesh has become a capital importer, running a current account deficit even before the COVID-19 pandemic. And, according to the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF’s) latest assessment of the country’s economy, the deficit is likely to persist well into the late 2020s.

A nation’s current account reflects the difference between its aggregate savings and investment, with a deficit signifying inadequate savings to meet its investment needs. With around 30% of GDP saved, the savings rate in Bangladesh cannot be said to be low – by way of comparison, Pakistan’s savings rate has tended to be around 15% of GDP. Rather, as Chart 1 shows, Bangladesh’s current account deficit reflects a strong investment boom before the pandemic that is set to resume in the coming years.

Further, Chart 2 shows that while private investment is set to recover to the pre-pandemic levels relative to GDP, shaking off recent woes, public investment is projected to scale new heights in the medium term. Of course, in and of itself, this is very sensible. Bangladesh is a developing country desperately in need of infrastructure – roads, railways, electricity generation, and so on. There is nothing wrong with financing some of these projects from external sources, provided the projects are well governed.

There are two elements to this. First, financing of many of these projects is quite one-sided against Bangladeshi taxpayers, the power purchase agreement with the Adani Group being a particularly egregious, but far from the only, example. Second, these projects are usually implemented with woeful management, resulting in significant cost overruns. According to the World Bank, for example, infrastructure projects were among the costliest in the world even in 2017.

While the persistent current account deficit may well have an upside to it, at least theoretically, there is nothing positive about a wobbly banking sector. Bangladesh’s banking sector is saddled with non-performing loans – where the borrower has failed to make interest or principal payments for an extended period. Chart 3 shows that the problem is particularly acute in the state-owned banks, which are also not well capitalised (Chart 4) – that is, they are not well placed to cover the risks associated with their lending.

Both the governance problems around the infrastructure megaprojects as well as the woes in the banking sector ultimately point to the country’s authoritarian political economy whereby the ruling regime, instead of governing with a mandate from the voters, has been relying on the support of powerful oligarchs who are given access to loans and opportunities without oversight.

Chart 5 shows the regression of electoral democracy in Bangladesh over the past decade using the V-Dem index. This index captures the extent to which governments are elected under free and fair elections with guaranteed freedom of association and expression. Countries are given a score between 0 and 1, the latter being most democratic.

In 2022, Bangladesh had a score of 0.27, compared with 0.4 in India and 0.39 in Pakistan. Bangladesh’s slide to authoritarianism reflects a one-sided election in January 2014 where the incumbent Awami League won 153 seats out of 300 unopposed, and a blatantly rigged election in December 2018 when ballot boxes were stuffed the night before the polling day.

Bangladesh’s turn towards a dictatorship is set to continue with the third consecutive one-sided election on January 7 – the opposition parties are boycotting the election in light of their past experience as well as the fact that over 20,000 of their members have been interned since late October through a draconian crackdown.

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina may look unassailable politically. But so did President Suharto of Indonesia in 1996. Contrary to the nostrum pushed by authoritarian leaders that they can make the tough decisions needed to address economic challenges, experiences in Southeast Asia (and indeed in many other countries around the world) suggest that authoritarian regimes with poorly governed banking sectors and mega projects often end up in significant political and economic crisis.

Instead of making tough decisions and taking on the vested interests, authoritarian regimes relied on the very same vested interests for their survival. The resulting cronyism only exacerbated the crisis, not resolved it. In Thailand and Indonesia, for example, the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 was followed by years of political conflict and economic stagnation.

Bangladesh, of course, has been experiencing considerable economic difficulty in the past couple of years, with the taka depreciating by over 40% against the US dollar despite the central bank burning through about half of its international reserves while inflation remained at double digits. The country’s noxious politics and unsound economic fundamentals make for a very combustible brew that could spill over beyond the border.

Jyoti Rahman is a Bangladeshi economist. His analyses are archived at: https://jrahman.substack.com/ and he can be contacted at Jyoti.rahman@gmail.com

Bangladesh: Opposition to Boycott General Election, Demands a Caretaker Govt to Hold Polls

Expressing doubt about the prospect of a fair and free election under Hasina’s leadership, opposition activists pointed to an ongoing crackdown on opposition politicians and critics.

New Delhi: Opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) supporters took to the streets on International Human Rights Day on Sunday (December 10), advocating for a non-partisan caretaker government to hold the upcoming general election on January 7.

Led by former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, the BNP is boycotting the election, leaving voters with limited options and potentially paving the way for Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League to secure a fourth consecutive term, the Hindu reported.

Expressing doubt about the prospect of a fair and free election under Hasina’s leadership, opposition activists pointed to an ongoing crackdown on opposition politicians and critics.

Sunday’s protest march came weeks after a massive opposition rally on October 28 turned violent.

Thousands of party leaders and activists, including Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, were subsequently arrested on what the opposition has called politically motivated charges.

According to a report by Human Rights Watch, 10,000 opposition activists have been arrested since October 28, and at least 16 people, including two police officers, lost their lives during the period of violence.

During the Sunday protest in front of the National Press Club in Dhaka, banners were displayed with messages such as “Human chain of family members of the victims of murder and enforced disappearances” and “We want the unconditional release of all prisoners.” Party officials warned against participating in what they called a “stage-managed election,” highlighting concerns about the integrity of the electoral process.

The government, however, has refuted claims of a crackdown and said that individuals involved in violence are being investigated on specific charges.

Emphasising the constitutional mandate to hold elections on time, Awami League leader Mohammad A. Arafat said, “It has no relation with the election. It’s a matter of their choice to join the polls. But they are resorting to violence in the name of protests, rather than joining the race.”

As Bangladesh gears up for its 12th election since gaining independence in 1971, concerns about the democratic process have been voiced by observers at home and abroad.

Reports in the media suggest that many independent candidates belong to the ruling Awami League, which has encouraged them to contest the election to make it look competitive, the Hindu reported.

Analysts and international organisations, including the US, the UN and the European Union, have expressed concerns about the inclusivity and morality of the election.

Iftekhar Zaman, head of the anti-corruption group Transparency International Bangladesh, said the election may be held on time but it will be “non-inclusive” and “morally void”.

Bangladesh: Key Opposition Leader Jailed Following Massive Anti-Government Protests

Police said that Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir was arrested in a case relating to the home of the country’s chief justice being attacked during the protests and is an accused in the murder of a policeman.

New Delhi: A Dhaka court sent Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, one of Bangladesh’s key opposition leaders, to jail on Sunday night (October 29).

Alamgir, the secretary general of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), was picked up by police on Sunday morning and sent to jail at around 10 pm Bangladesh time, the local newspaper Daily Star reported.

Police told the Daily Star that Alamgir was arrested in a case relating to the home of the country’s chief justice being attacked on Saturday.

Tens of thousands of protestors – with some estimating their strength at over 100,000 or even around 200,000 – gathered in Dhaka on Saturday, demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina before the general elections in January 2024.

They also called for free and fair elections under a caretaker government.

But the protests turned violent, leading to two people dying and more than 100 suffering injuries, according to media reports.

Police used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse protestors, and they reportedly said that one of the two casualties from Saturday was an officer who was hacked to death.

“At least 164 [BNP members] including Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir were accused of murdering the police officer,” DW quoted police official Salahuddin Mia as saying late on Sunday.

Alamgir has led the party since the arrest and imprisonment of former prime minister and BNP chief Khaleda Zia after she was convicted in corruption cases in 2018.

His bail plea was rejected on Sunday night, as per the Associated Press.

Police and the country’s opposition have blamed each other for the violence.

The BNP has held large protests in recent months in Bangladesh. Representative image. Photo: Jubair Bin Iqbal/CC-BY-SA-4.0.

The BNP carried out a day-long strike on Sunday.

Many markets remained closed in Dhaka and public transport in the city was scant, news agency AFP reported.

At the same time, AP cited local media as reporting that two people died in Dhaka on Sunday and police arrested at least 540 opposition supporters in the city.

Members of the ruling Awami League party and its allies will hold a rally in Dhaka today (Monday) to denounce Saturday’s violence, AP’s report continued to say, adding that the BNP has called for a three-day countrywide road blockade starting on Tuesday.

The Awami League and its leader Sheikh Hasina have maintained that the country’s next general election must be overseen by the current government as per the provisions of the constitution.

Hasina has presided over the consolidation of the Awami League’s power in Bangladesh since 2009, facing allegations that she has suppressed opposition and critical voices in the country. She has been accused of human rights violations, cracking down on free speech and suppressing dissent while jailing her critics – including Zia.

Her party was accused of rigging the last two elections in 2014 and 2018.

With inputs from DW.

Why Bangladesh’s Democracy Is on Life Support

Political meddling and state violence could break Bangladesh’s fragile hold on democracy.

A potentially long political crisis is looming over Bangladesh before a date is even set for next year’s elections.

Since its birth as an independent country in 1971, Bangladesh has had a troubled relationship with democracy and the rule of law, undergoing the assassination of its founding president and a series of coups and countercoups in its first decades.

The political landscape has been characterised by an array of governance systems, shifting between one-party rule, military control, electoral democracy and an autocracy under a civilian government.

With an election coming in January 2024, the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party has been raising the pressure, taking to the streets in a series of massive rallies to demand the election be held under a neutral caretaker government.

However, the governing Bangladesh Awami League is adamant it will go ahead with the election under current Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

The last election considered free and fair took place in 2008 and catapulted Hasina to power the following year.

Elections in 2014 and 2018 were marked by controversies. The 2014 election faced opposition boycotts. Major liberal democracies including the US and Australia called for a new vote but India, Russia and China expressed no problem with the result.

Also Read: An Unholy Omen Is Looming Over Bangladesh

While the US voices concerns about democratic backsliding in Bangladesh, China and Russia continue to lend support to the current regime.

In an apparent rebuke to US pressure on Hasina, China’s Ambassador to Bangladesh recently said his country would not meddle in Bangladesh’s internal affairs, and Russia denounced what it called interference by the US envoy in Bangladesh.

India’s position remains complex. It must navigate its historical and close ties with Bangladesh while confronting allegations of enabling authoritarianism.

A free and fair election would likely stop Bangladesh’s authoritarian slide and pave the way for greater accountability. The economy is struggling and unemployment is rising.

For a country full of young people, with a larger Muslim population than Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Iran combined, a functioning democracy might offer the only chance to return a sense of optimism.

However, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party could boycott the upcoming election if their demand for a caretaker government is not met. Even then, they would likely persist with countrywide street protests.

Although the opposition participated in the 2018 election, the vote was marred by allegations of intimidation, repression of the opposition and widespread vote rigging, including ballot stuffing for the ruling party.

Transparency International Bangladesh found multiple anomalies in 47 out of 50 seats it surveyed for voting integrity.

Bangladesh has experienced democratic backsliding under incumbent Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. Photo: PTI/File.

Hasina has insisted that “the people” are with her because of the country’s economic growth and infrastructure development during her tenure. She has been lauded by the World Bank and the United Nations, while US economist Jeffrey Sachs has hailed her leadership.

The police, judiciary and state bureaucrats are seen as all-in for Hasina. Meanwhile, the international community, especially the US, may take further measures – such as additional sanctions and visa bans – against those it views as tampering with the electoral process.

Elections used to be a cause for celebration in the country. Now millions of younger people are finding their basic right to choose their leaders has been suppressed, while draconian anti-free speech laws have squelched their ability to criticise the powerful.

Human rights organisations have accused Sheikh Hasina’s government of brutal tactics, including forced disappearances, extrajudicial killings and imprisonment of critics and opposition figures.

According to Human Rights Watch, more than 600 people have disappeared since 2009. Security forces have been implicated in 600 extrajudicial killings since 2018. Swedish investigative news site Netra News found a secret prison named ‘Aynaghar’ (‘house of mirrors’) in Dhaka Cantonment where missing people are allegedly held.

In December 2021, the Biden administration announced the US would impose sanctions against the elite paramilitary force Rapid Action Battalion and six of its former officials, as well as current and recent heads of the Bangladesh Police. The US state department also imposed a visa ban on two former police officials and their family members for gross human rights violations.

The New York Times noted that millions of opposition activists were on trial in a display of how politicised the judiciary had become.

Nobel Laurate Muhammad Yunus is facing 198 court cases and a deputy attorney general who said that Yunus was facing judicial harassment has been sacked.

The World Jurist Project ranks Bangladesh 127 out of 140 countries in its rule of law index. Freedom House ranks the country as partly free, and the latest World Press Freedom Index ranks Bangladesh at 163 – lower than Afghanistan (152) and autocratic Cambodia (147).

Meanwhile, politicians and businessmen with deep ties to the current government have reportedly bought homes and established companies in the US, Canada, Singapore and elsewhere.

Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™.

How Are Bangladesh’s Political Parties Preparing for the Next General Elections?

Little seems to be in the way of Awami League leader Sheikh Hasina successful seeking to win a fifth term overall and a fourth consecutive term as the prime minister.

At Dhaka’s iconic Suhrawardy Udyan, the Bangladesh Awami League held its 22nd National Council on December 24. In the presence of thousands of councillors, leaders and activists, Sheikh Hasina Wazed was elected president of the Awami League for the 10th consecutive time.

With the general elections due to be held in December 2023 or January 2024, Hasina is seeking to win a fifth term overall and a fourth consecutive term as the prime minister of Bangladesh.

Bangladesh’s voters elect 300 members to its unicameral national parliament, who then vote to elect 50 women parliamentarians, to ensure their adequate representation. The ‘Jatiya Sangsad’ of 350 members elects a prime minister.

Hasina is the world’s longest-serving female head of government in history.

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina gestures after casting her vote in the morning during the general election in Dhaka, Bangladesh, December 30, 2018. Photo: Reuters

Opposition space

Out of power since 2006, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) – led by former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia – has been organising a series of rallies across the country over the past few weeks. The party has demanded the dissolution of parliament and a neutral interim caretaker government.

The primary demand of the BNP is the withdrawal of cases against its party chief Zia and her son Tarique Rahman.

Also read: Bangladesh: Defying Curbs, Anti-govt Protesters Gather in Dhaka, Demand PM Hasina’s Resignation

Zia, who has twice been prime minister, was convicted in a graft case in February 2018. In 2019, she was released for medical treatment, reportedly on Hasina’s instructions. In the following year, the government through an executive order released her for six months on the condition that she will stay at her home in Dhaka and not leave the country.

Since her release, Zia, now 76, has refrained from making any political moves. Any attempt to re-enter politics would mean a return to jail.

BNP acting chief Rahman – who was sentenced to life imprisonment over a 2004 assassination attempt on Hasina – has been leading a fugitive life in London for more than a decade now. Other prominent party members are either abroad or facing jail sentences for corruption or extremism.

In 2014, BNP activists carried out systematic bombings on religious minorities, resulting in the worst election violence to date.

The party’s dismal performance in the 2018 elections proved that its leaders had lost both support and sympathy. But this time around, BNP’s remaining leadership appears divided over its poll strategy, and even over whether it will contest the polls.

Bereft of leadership, the party was unable to position itself in leading movements like the 2013 Shahbag protests, which demanded a death sentence for Jamaat-e-Islami leader Abdul Quader Mollah or the Hefazat-e-Islam’s counter-protest movement, which reflected the politics of religious fundamentalism in the country.

While the BNP failed to display any electoral expediency, the Awami League drew support from the Hefazat-e-Islam, an organisation of radical clerics from Qawmi madrasas, by allowing a few concessions.

In 2018, the Hefazat conferred Hasina with the epithet ‘Mother of the Qawmi’ for allowing the recognition of degrees from the Qawmi madrassas. However, the secular Awami League could not continue this alliance of convenience and has since taken a tough stance against the Hefazat leaders.

The death of its amirs, Ahmad Shafi and Junaid Babunagari, will impact the ability of this hardline group to sway the radical madrassa voters as it did in the previous election.

The Jamaat-e-Islami, Bangladesh’s largest Islamic political party, infamous for opposing the Liberation war and a key ally of the BNP, was stripped of its registration ahead of the 2018 election.

It is trying to re-enter the poll fray by fielding proxies, and registering itself as the ‘Bangladesh Development Party’. However, this is not the first time that the party has tried to re-enter the political process by changing its name. In 2020, it launched the ‘Amar Bangladesh Party’. It also did an about-face, declaring that the 1971 war was a significant platform of national consensus.

Separately, the BNP has proposed reforms to ensure that ‘no individual will be eligible to serve as the president or prime minister of the country for more than two consecutive terms’. It has also been demanding the formation of an interim government to oversee the next general.

But in the early 90s, when Hasina had demanded the constitution of a non-partisan interim government to oversee the elections, Zia’s government was emphatically against it. The constitutional provision of the interim government was introduced in 1996, and as per the Opposition, the Awami League ended it in 2011. But while it lasted it didn’t exactly guarantee peaceful elections.

Khaleda Zia, former Prime Minister of Bangladesh and the chief of main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party, arrives in court to seek bail in Dhaka, Bangladesh, August 10, 2016. Photo: Reuters/Mohammad Ponir Hossain

When the BNP completed its tenure in 2006, violent disagreements over the composition of the caretaker government between the two major political parties led to a volatile situation. The January 2007 elections had to be cancelled, and former President Iajuddin Ahmed declared a state of emergency. The caretaker government itself was accused of abuse of power and partisan politics.

The Awami League government has reasoned that in the previous elections, a caretaker government was needed because the Election Commission (EC) never had a legal basis in Bangladesh. But in January 2022, the country passed a new law legalising the formation of the EC. Under the law, a committee was formed for the appointment of the chief election commissioner (CEC) and election commissioners.

The new law was introduced at a time when the election credibility in Bangladesh was under question.

Moreover, the arbitrary appointment of CECs and election commissioners had cast doubts on the fairness of elections in Bangladesh. There were allegations that election laws were being interpreted differently by different commissioners.

Former defence secretary, Kazi Habibul Awal, is the new CEC.

In the past, Bangladesh has accused Pakistan of interference in its domestic affairs. With Jamaat and its radical student wing, the Islamic Chhatra Shibir, trying to register as new proxies, the EC must take extra care in scrutinising the documents.

As electioneering heats up, there are fears that the BNP and Jamaat will combine to launch a campaign of massive street violence similar to the 2014 polls. In the absence of defining leadership, a lack of a definitive political direction, and inadequate public support, the best the BNP can hope for is a breakdown of law and order, an effort at tarnishing the election process.

Hasina’s campaign

Hasina’s critics have accused her of authoritarianism. There are also concerns over arbitrary arrests and harassment of opposition groups. But what works for her is the transformative change that the Awami League government has brought to the country, exhibiting a commitment for long-term development.

Also read: As Hasina Visits India Ahead of Bangladesh Polls Next Year, Issues Old and New on the Agenda

Additionally, Bangladesh’s economy has performed remarkably. Surveys by the US-based International Republican Institute (IRI) indicate that Hasina’s government is popular but there are increasing concerns about corruption.

The possibility of anti-incumbency that the Awami League might face will be offset by the lack of support the BNP has because of poll violence it had unleashed in the past.

Having cleverly balanced relations with India and China, Hasina’s re-election as prime minister suits Bangladesh’s two largest investment partners. If it acts upon the allegations of corruption and high-handedness, with the structural reforms and its commitment to long-term economic development, the Awami League is the only real contender in Bangladesh’s next general elections.

Vaishali Basu Sharma is an analyst of strategic and economic affairs.

As Hasina Visits India Ahead of Bangladesh Polls Next Year, Issues Old and New on the Agenda

The Bangladeshi PM’s visits to India are closely scrutinised in her country and there’s an expectation of concrete movement on topics like water sharing, along with an agreement on a long-term fuel supply.

New Delhi: As Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina begins her last state visit to India before elections next year, the expectation back home is that there will be some concrete movement on politically emotive topics like water sharing and border killings, along with the arrangement of a long-term fuel supply arrangement to combat rising energy prices.

While she landed in New Delhi on Monday afternoon, the main takeaways of Sheikh Hasina’s third state visit will be unveiled after the formal meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday afternoon.

With close relations with India being a leitmotif throughout her four terms as prime minister, it is not surprising that Hasina’s bilateral trips are scrutinised thread-bare in Bangladesh’s spirited polity and civil society. This time, the scrutiny of Dhaka’s gains from this relationship will be particularly intense, with general elections scheduled in 2023.

Unlike South Block’s tradition of not publicly revealing any possible outcomes before a diplomatic visit, Bangladesh has already outlined the likely results. Speaking to reporters in Dhaka, Bangladeshi foreign minister A.K. Abdul Momen said on Sunday that at least seven agreements – in areas like water, railway, law, science and technology, information and broadcasting – are likely to be inked.

Among them, the most important, politically, for the Bangladesh government will be the water-sharing agreement for the Kushiyara river, a distributary of the Barak river.

As a lower-riparian that shares 54 rivers with India, water has always been a sensitive matter for Bangladeshis. Speaking to The Wire, former Bangladesh foreign secretary Shamsher M. Chowdhury explained that water was the number one emotive issue for the people of Bangladesh. “For us, water is life. It means everything to us… It is an issue that cuts across society,” he said.

While the Teesta draft agreement remains in deep freeze since 2011, there has been a considerable effort on both sides to ensure Sheikh Hasina will return home with a bilateral water-sharing agreement, only the second in the last 50 years, in her bag.

Last month, the Joint Rivers Commission met at the ministerial level after a gap of 12 years. The official readout noted that the text of the water-sharing agreement for the Kushiyara river had been finalised. Bangladeshi state minister for water resources, Zahid Farooque, who led the Bangladesh delegation, announced after the meeting that India had agreed to provide 153 cusecs of water from the Kushiyara river.

“Progress should be made on rivers that have been under discussion for so many years. For a number of reasons, it is a primary issue… River water has a usage issue that can be done for mutual benefit. The climate issue is also linked to it. It has assumed a lot of significance due to recent developments in South Asia and also globally,” retired Bangladeshi diplomat ambassador M. Humayun Kabir told The Wire.

Besides the Kushiyara river pacts, technical talks on having a framework for water sharing were widened to 15 rivers in total at the JRC meeting – a positive result that will help demonstrate more progress on the crucial water agenda to a domestic audience.

Also Read: PMO Has No Record of Modi’s Claim of Going to Jail Over Satyagraha for Bangladesh’s Independence

Border killings, another emotive issue

Alongside water, there is another topic related to India that generates an equal amount of emotion in Bangladesh. “Border killing (by Indian security personnel) is also very emotive. Both the leaders have to make sure that the commitments, particularly from the Indian side, are kept and reflected on the ground,” said Kabir.

The last several joint statements have always included an understanding that border guards should “bring down such death of civilians to zero”. But, while the numbers have reduced in certain years, it has certainly not come down to zero, as per Bangladeshi civil society groups.

According to the Bangladeshi human rights organisation Odhikar, at least 1253 have been allegedly killed at the border by Border Security Force between 2000 and 2021.

The New Age newspaper, citing statistics from the Border Guards Bangladesh, reported that 161 Bangladeshis were killed by the Border Security Force (BSF) between January 2015 and June 2022.

“How much one can decriminalise smuggling, something has to be done concretely to bring down border killing. It is an image question. The sight of one Felani hanging on the barbed wire burned every Bangladeshi’s heart for years,” said Chowdhury, who had headed Bangladesh’s foreign service from 2001 to 2005.

The retired diplomat was referring to the 2011 killing of 15-year-old Felani, who was shot at the border by BSF personnel when she was attempting to return home to Bangladesh. The photograph of her dead body strung out at the border fence led to a massive outcry within Bangladesh.

According to the head of India’s BSF, there has been a substantial reduction in killings, with all those shot being alleged “listed and notorious” criminals while crossing the border at night.

Indian Border Security Force (BSF) soldiers walk across the open border with Bangladesh to attend a flag meeting in West Bengal, India, June 20, 2015. Credit: Reuters/Rupak De Chowdhuri/File photo

Border Security Force (BSF) soldiers walk across the open border with Bangladesh in West Bengal, June 20, 2015. Photo: Reuters/Rupak De Chowdhuri

A new crisis: Fuel

While the water and border killings have been part of the discourse for a long time, Hasina is facing a new crisis due to the Ukraine war.

In just one week, Bangladesh hiked fuel prices by over 50%, leading to rising public anger and resentment.

With foreign currency reserves depleting, there was a worry that Bangladesh could go the Sri Lanka way. In July, after Sri Lanka and Pakistan, Bangladesh became the third South Asian country to seek a loan from the International Monetary Fund.

However, Prime Minister Hasina dismissed the possibility of her country sharing Colombo’s fate, but anxieties persist.

In the run-up to the current state visit, Bangladeshi media reported that Dhaka was looking to set up a long-term fuel supply arrangement with India.

“So we will definitely try to enter a long-term agreement with them if they have a surplus. But it will depend on how much they have in excess. They have their own supply and demand thing,” Bangladesh foreign secretary Masud Bin Momen said on August 29.

Bangladesh had indicated earlier that it would like to avoid the risks by importing cheaper Russian oil through the Indians, who have become one of Moscow’s largest buyers.

At the pre-visit media conference on Sunday, Bangladeshi junior foreign minister Shahriar Alam dismissed plans to buy Russian oil through India, but added that a fuel supply arrangement was definitely on the table.

There will also be discussions on Bangladesh’s plan to buy hydro-powered electricity from Nepal and Bhutan through the Indian electricity grid. Still, no tripartite agreement is likely to be signed.

“Bangladesh is interested in diversifying its energy sources on a sustainable long-term basis, keeping the climate issue in mind,” said Kabir.

The first-ever free trade agreement negotiations for Dhaka

In the economic field, Hasina will also be able to showcase the launch of negotiations for a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Programme (CEPA) with India, which will be the first-ever experience in negotiating a free trade agreement for Dhaka.

Bangladesh is India’s biggest trade partner in South Asia, with bilateral trade volume reaching $18 billion last year.

With Bangladeshi imports reaching $2 billion, there has been a sharp increase in the presence of Bangladeshi goods in India. Chowdhury recounted that when he visited a Marks and Spencer showroom in Delhi malls, all the garment labels showed ‘made in Bangladesh’. “If you travel to Tripura, the shops are filled with Pran products,” he said.

However, the trade deficit in favour of India continued to widen as Indian exports to Bangladesh also rose exponentially. However, the trade deficit has not been as much of an issue in recent years, as it often helps to keep the prices of essential commodities low in Bangladesh.

At the same time, Bangladesh has a rising interest in tapping the market of India’s northeastern states through investment in the region, where a comprehensive free trade pact could be helpful.

A woman works in a garment factory in Dhaka, May 3, 2020. Photo: Reuters/Mohammad Ponir Hossain

Better connectivity also on the agenda

But, giving a fillip to trade ties requires better connectivity.

For the last several years, India has been touting the resumption of rail links, the building of bridges and the opening up of the riverine route for transit traffic as crucial achievements in building connectivity infrastructure.

However, there are still many loopholes left in using the existing infrastructure, crippled by inefficient processes at the border.

A February 2022 post by World Bank’s regional director for South Asia Regional Integration and Engagement, Mandakini Kaul, recounted a visit to Integrated Check Posts at Petrapole on India’s side of the border with Bangladesh. It is South Asia’s largest land port, accounting for over one-third of land-based traffic between the two neighbours.

While Petrapole can handle 750 trucks daily, it only clears only 370 trucks per day, as that’s the maximum capacity in Bangladesh’s Benapole. It results in a long line of trucks lined up for kilometres on either side of the border.

Kaul wrote that a truck required an average of 138 hours for its shipment to cross the border at Petrapole. “By comparison, trucks need less than six hours to cross borders in other regions,” she observed.

Kaul felt that the biggest hurdle to integration and trade was the unloading and reloading of goods in a new truck registered in the host country when crossing borders.

Even people-to-people movement at the land border continues to be more of a waiting game. “Even with an Indian visa, if we have to wait at the border for six to seven hours as forms, probably from the British Raj era, are filled in and checked, then how can we talk about seamless connectivity? Why can’t we replicate the airport immigration systems at the land border?” asked Chowdhury.

Incidentally, the Indian missions in Bangladesh grant the largest number of visas worldwide. In 2019, 13.63 lakh visas were issued before the numbers decreased drastically in the last two years due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Will soft ties continue to build?

One of the two primary markers of the improved ties between India and Bangladesh after Hasina took over in 2009 has been close security ties and soft ties.

Even as security cooperation has led to a sharp decline in insurgency activity in India’s northeast, Dhaka is also the second largest recipient of India’s grants and loans, after Bhutan.

In 2011, India offered its biggest ever $1 billion line of credit to Bangladesh during Hasina’s visit. Since then, three other lines of credit have also been extended, bringing the total amount to $7.862 billion.

However, the disbursement has only been around $1 billion, with contracts worth $2 billion signed.

The slow pace of utilisation of the lines of credit has undoubtedly been a source of frustration, figuring in discussions in media ahead of the visit. “Not only has a small portion of the LOC commitment been utilised, but now both sides are thinking of dropping some of the projects. Apparently, it may soon be time for Bangladesh to pay back some of the interest even before the projects are completed. There is a lot of discussion going on about this,” said Ambassador Kabir.

He conveyed that there was a general feeling in Dhaka that “India has taken more and Bangladesh has not gained that much”. “There has to be a balance in give and take.. this kind of feeling (of not gaining from the relationship) can be had even between countries with normal and friendly relations”.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. Photo: Reuters/Files

The Rohingya refugees

While these bilateral issues will dominate discussions, Bangladesh is also likely to bring up the matter of the repatriation of the 1.1 million Rohingyas, who fled from Myanmar in 2017 after a massive security crackdown.

While there had been initially some disappointment in Dhaka about India’s position, there is now an understanding that the main leverage on the military junta lies with China.

“There is, of course, a genuine expectation in Bangladesh that the Rohingyas should return to Myanmar. India has some leverage and should exercise that leverage. But the bigger leverage (over the Myanmar government) is with some other country. They are absolutely not willing to put any pressure on Myanmar to take the Rohingyas back. Myanmar’s rigidity on Rohingyas is strictly because of the support they receive from their other, bigger friend,” said Chowdhury.

Over the last weekend, there had been reports of Myanmar military aircraft crossing into Bangladeshi airspace and shells landing across the boundary. “While they don’t want to repatriate (Rohingyas), they should not create a sense of tension at the border… India does have that much with Myanmar to convey the concern and should use it,” proposed the former foreign secretary.

At the same time, India’s policy towards Rohingyas had led to differences in perception, especially when cases came to light of refugees being ‘pushed back’ into Bangladeshi territory.

“How can you push Rohingyas into Bangladesh? If you want to push them, push them into Myanmar, but not onto Bangladesh. What has Bangladesh to do with them?” asked Kabir. He also added that given the prevailing situation in Myanmar, it would be “inhumane” to deport Rohingya refugees.

While calling for New Delhi to play a “big role” in persuading Myanmar to take back Rohingyas, Bangladesh’s prime minister also noted on Sunday that India could have accommodated more due to its immense size.

“Well you know… for us, it’s a big burden. India is a vast country; you can accommodate, but you don’t have much. So well… we are consulting with the international community and also our neighbouring countries, they should also take some steps so that they can go back home,” Hasina told the Indian news agency ANI.

UN Calls for Probe Into Bangladesh Elections

Prim Minister Sheikh Hasina’s ruling alliance won more than 90% of the seats contested in Sunday’s election, which was marred by accusations of ballot stuffing, voter intimidation and violence that killed at least 19 people.

Dhaka: The United Nations on Friday called for an independent and impartial investigation into the Dec. 30 election in Bangladesh in which Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina won a third straight term amid accusations of violence and voting irregularities.

Hasina’s ruling alliance won more than 90% of the seats contested in Sunday’s election, which was marred by accusations of ballot stuffing, voter intimidation and violence that killed at least 19 people.

Opponents rejected the election result but Hasina and her Awami League have denied any impropriety, saying that the vote was peaceful and there was enthusiastic participation from her supporters.

Also read: Western Powers Call for Probe Into Bangladesh Election Irregularities, Violence

“We urge the authorities to carry out prompt, independent, impartial and effective investigations into all alleged acts of violence and human rights violations related to the elections, with a view to holding accountable those responsible, regardless of their political affiliations,” the United Nations said.

On Thursday, newly elected members of parliament, including Hasina, were sworn in, but the seven opposition members stayed away, saying the results were rigged and calling for a new election.

“There are worrying indications that reprisals have continued to take place, notably against the political opposition, including physical attacks and ill-treatment, arbitrary arrests, harassment, disappearances and filing of criminal cases,” the United Nations said.

“Reports suggest that violent attacks and intimidation, including against minorities, have been disproportionately carried out by ruling party activists, at times with complicity or involvement of law enforcement officers.”

Also read: Bangladesh Opposition Boycotts Swearing-in Ceremony, Calls for New Election

The United Nations called on the authorities to take urgent measures to prevent further reprisals, and to ensure that law enforcement authorities exercised their powers in accordance with the rule of law.

It also urged the national Human Rights Commission to play an independent and proactive role.

Western governments, including the United States and the European Union, have condemned the election-day violence and called for an investigation into a range of irregularities.

On Thursday, New York-based Human Rights Watch said the run-up to the vote was characterised by “violence and intimidation against the opposition … and the misuse of laws to limit free speech”.

(Reuters)