The burden after the ballot

It is harder to preserve democracy than to achieve it. That thought keeps hovering stubbornly like an ominous cloud even as the newly elected government takes oath.

Time and again, the people have dethroned dictators at great cost, only to see the new system become derailed within years.

If we look back we can see that Bangladesh has always had a rocky democracy.

In 1969, the people rose against Pakistani military rulers, paving the way for Pakistan’s first national polls in 1970. The Awami League won a clear mandate, but the junta refused to transfer power. Instead, war was imposed on East Pakistan. Citizens resisted in a brutal nine-month struggle, culminating in the birth of Bangladesh on December 16, 1971.

Yet, just four years into independence, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman introduced one-party rule through BAKSAL. His assassination in 1975 plunged the country into coups, counter-coups, and military regimes.

In the 1980s, students spearheaded protests against military dictator HM Ershad. Their movement grew into a mass uprising, forcing Ershad to resign on December 6, 1990. This was a turning point, sparking hope that Bangladesh could finally build a democratic nation.

The BNP’s victory in 1991 under an interim government restored parliamentary democracy, but optimism soon faded as political crises deepened.

The caretaker government system, adopted after Awami League-led protests in 1996, became a recurring source of tension.

In 2007–2008, disputes over caretaker leadership led to a military-backed interim government.

The Awami League came to power through the December 2008 polls. Over time, however, its rule increasingly took on authoritarian characteristics. In 2011, the party abolished the caretaker government system, a move that reshaped the electoral landscape. Since then, three national elections held under Awami League rule -- in 2014, 2018, and 2024 -- have faced widespread accusations of manipulation. Many observers argue that during this period, both the Election Commission and parliament were reduced to little more than rubber stamps.

Over time, parliament weakened, failing to hold the executive accountable. Opposition boycotts, abusive rhetoric, and near-total absence of dissent hollowed out democratic debate. Media restrictions, suppression of free speech, and criminalisation of politics worsened the crisis. Between 2009 and 2023, billions were siphoned abroad, with critics branding the system a “kleptocracy.” And in August 2024, a student-led mass uprising dethroned Sheikh Hasina’s government.

Prof Yunus’s government achieved a rare success in Bangladesh’s electoral history: it managed to keep the election atmosphere largely free of violence, thanks to strong support from the armed forces and law enforcement agencies.

Following the polls, all political parties respected the outcome and accepted the results. Some even announced plans to form shadow cabinets to act as watchdogs.

Although a few opposition voices questioned the Election Commission’s role, these were rather limited. If the commission can maintain the same level of neutrality in upcoming local elections, public confidence in this vital institution of the republic may be restored. Such credibility is essential, as the commission is entrusted with safeguarding the democratic ideal of free and fair elections.

Yet, important questions remain. How will other political institutions, particularly the parliament, perform? Will the executive finally be held accountable in the House, after years of evading scrutiny?

The struggle to restore democracy does not end with a single victory with the ballots. It continues through the hard work of protecting justice, strengthening institutions, and ensuring national unity.

Only by making parliament effective, giving EC freedom to hold polls freely, the judiciary independent, and real accountability can Bangladesh preserve the democracy its people have fought for time and again.