Bangladeshis deserve a government and an opposition willing and able to work together to address the problems of greatest concern to the country. A free and fair election should be a first step towards that result, but it’s a mistake to think that a credible, competitive, peaceful and participatory election automatically guarantees a well-functioning government. In fact, history shows us the opposite.
No election can be perfect, but international and domestic election observers awarded high marks to Bangladesh’s ninth parliamentary election in December 2008. Voters expressed overwhelming satisfaction with the process in public opinion surveys conducted before, on and after election day. Whether you consider the 2008 election the best in the country’s history, or just its most recent credible election, it provides a cautionary tale for citizens today.
In that election, the Awami League won a majority of seats large enough to amend the constitution at the direction of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. The BNP-led parliamentary opposition chose to boycott their seats soon after the Jatiya Sangsad convened in 2009. To be fair, the parliamentary opposition would not have been able to block the passage of any laws or constitutional amendments had opposition MPs been present, but their wilful absence from the legislature began the period of de facto one-party rule in Bangladesh.
Many sacrificed their lives to end the abuses of that one-party regime in 2024, but with a new elected government to be chosen in just a few days, Bangladesh is in danger of looping back into that downward spiral. We shouldn’t confuse a legitimately elected ruling party delivering the candidates that voters pick with a legitimately performing ruling party delivering the results that voters seek. The speed with which the country raced from a highly credible election to the consolidation of power under an authoritarian system is shocking when we look back.
Hopes are high for the rapidly approaching 13th parliamentary election and referendum on the July National Charter. A survey by Innovision last month found that 72 percent of Bangladeshis expect the interim government to administer the election impartially, and 82 percent feel they can safely cast their ballots. In fact, in a survey by the International Republic Institute conducted in September-October 2025, citizens named “ensuring free and fair elections” as the top reform they wanted from the interim government.
It’s natural to want to over emphasise the quality of the election process itself, especially when the context is novel and the stakes are high. A free and fair election is important for the country at this time, but it’s not the only important thing. Bangladesh’s 12.77 crore registered voters deserve to hear from the candidates openly, make their decisions free of pressure, and cast their ballots in safety knowing that they will be counted accurately. But the same voters also deserve to know that the men and women they choose to run the government will serve in the offices they campaigned for, use their voice and votes in parliament and its committee rooms to advance the promises made in their electoral manifestos, cooperate with like-minded individuals for common cause regardless of party affiliation, and keep working to improve the lives of Bangladeshis for the duration of their terms.
A free and fair election does have intrinsic value because it honours people’s rights. But it’s just the starting point. More weight must be placed on how the winners of the February 12 election work together when the next parliament convenes, and throughout their five-year terms thereafter. Using that metric to assess the quality of an election won’t be popular with the winning or losing political parties because it is performance-based. It won’t be popular with journalists hounding observers to announce if the election was “free and fair” as quickly as possible. For the same reasons that all reputable professional election observation organisations have quietly discarded that hollow phrase, we need a better results-based way to assess whether an election has “worked.”
Elections aren’t held for the benefit of the political parties. They allow voters to assign responsibility for solving problems through good governance, meaningful allocation of public resources, safeguarding people’s rights, and ensuring the rule of law. Don’t assume that a free and fair election makes that automatic. For that, we require a government and an opposition willing to work on the issues people care about most.
Jeffrey Noel Vanness is managing partner at Compasspoint LLC, an analytical services company. He has worked on good governance projects in Bangladesh since 2007.
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.
Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries, and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.
