International day of democracy: The politics of never letting go

All political parties that took part in the National Consensus Commission process agreed on one important issue: no individual should serve as prime minister for more than 10 years in total, regardless of the number of terms.

But there is an obvious contradiction.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

While political parties have agreed that the country’s top executive office should be subject to a time limit, only a few have meaningful limits on how long an individual can remain at the helm of the party itself.

This raises a larger question -- if political parties are the foundation of democracy, should they themselves not practise the democracy they demand from the state?

An analysis of Bangladesh’s political parties reveals a culture of entrenched leadership, with party chiefs remaining in power for decades and stepping down only because of ill health, legal troubles or death.

Political parties are meant to be the training grounds for democracy. They bring citizens into politics, nurture leaders, teach tolerance, and offer people competing choices.

Yet when parties are organised around individuals rather than institutions, democracy begins to weaken long before they come to power.

Party constitutions talk about councils and leadership elections, but in practice, such exercises are often more ceremonial than competitive. Even when elections are held, grassroots participation is largely ignored. This is not merely an internal party matter -- it shapes how the state is governed.

A politician who rises through debate and competition learns accountability and to negotiate with those who disagree. A politician who advances without such experiences learns a different lesson: that obedience, not persuasion, is the path to advancement. That distinction becomes critical once the party takes power.

THEIR LONG REIGNS

Sheikh Hasina has been leading the Awami League, whose activities have been banned, for 45 years, since 1981, while Khaleda Zia served as BNP chairperson for 40 years until her death in 2025. Hussein Mohammad Ershad led the Jatiya Party from its founding in 1986 until his death in 2019. Jamaat-e-Islami’s Ghulam Azam led the party for 21 years, followed by Matiur Rahman Nizami, who remained at the helm for 16 years until his execution in 2016.

Other parties show similar patterns. Muzaffar Ahmad led NAP for 52 years until 2019; Dr Kamal Hossain has been leading Gono Forum for 30 years; Rashed Khan Menon has been at the helm of the Workers Party for 20; Hasanul Haque Inu has been leading his JSD faction for 24; and Mujahidul Islam Selim led the Communist Party for 30 years, either as general secretary or president, until 2022. Khalequzzaman led the Bangladesher Samajtantrik Dal for 42 years until 2022.

ASM Rob has been leading his JSD faction since 2001; Andaleeve Rahman Partha has been heading the Bangladesh Jatiya Party since 2008; and Anwar Hossain Manju has been leading another faction since 2002. Zonayed Saki led Ganosamhati Andolon from 2002 until joining parliament this February, while Badruddin Umar led the Jatiya Mukti Council from 2003 until his death in 2025. AQM Badruddoza Chowdhury founded Bikalpa Dhara Bangladesh in 2004 and served as its president for 20 years until his death in 2024. Oli Ahmed has been leading the Liberal Democratic Party since 2006.

Dilip Barua has been the chair of the Bangladesher Samyabadi Dal since 1987; Abdul Kader Siddique has been heading the Krishak Sramik Janata League since 1999; and Saiful Haque has been general secretary of the Revolutionary Workers Party since 2004.

Religious and Islamist parties show a similar trend. Syed Rezaul Karim has been leading Islami Andolan Bangladesh since 2006, while Syed Najibul Bashar Maizbhandari has been chairing the Bangladesh Tarikat Federation since 2005. The Bangladesh Khelafat Andolan was founded by Muhammadullah Hafezzee in 1981, who was succeeded by his son, Shah Ahmedullah Ashraf, until 2014. The Zaker Party has been chaired by Mostafa Amir Faisal since 1989.

In this sense, Bangladesh’s democratic problem is cultural before it is constitutional.

The country has spent decades debating how power should be transferred while paying less attention to how political leaders learn to share, limit and ultimately relinquish power.

The contradiction has become deeply embedded in Bangladesh’s politics. A leader may be popular, historically significant or electorally successful -- but none of these qualities makes permanent leadership democratic.

Democracy requires the possibility that even a popular leader can be challenged. Without that, a party ceases to function as an organisation of citizens and becomes a hierarchy of followers.

The consequences extend to the next generation. Young activists learn that advancement depends less on ideas, organisational ability or public support than on proximity to those who control the party. Politics then becomes a system of patronage rather than a competition of ideas.

That is how political culture reproduces itself.

Bangladesh now faces a difficult but necessary transition -- from politics centred on personalities to politics centred on institutions -- if it is to become a truly democratic state.