logo
Bangladesh Is Finally Going For National Elections By April 2026

Bangladesh Is Finally Going For National Elections By April 2026

Arabian Posta day ago

By Nitya Chakraborty
The interim Chief Adviser of Bangladesh Government Dr. Muhammad Yunus has finally announced the holding of national elections in the country in the first half of April next year defying the demand of the main opposition party BNP to hold it in December this year. The final dates will be notified by the Election Commission. The EC will also be notifying the norms as also the criteria for the eligibility of the candidates for contesting the polls
Chief Adviser Dr. Yunus is currently in London on a four day official visit to United Kingdom. He will be meeting the British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer as also other leading ministers of the Labour government. He is expected to have a meeting with Tarique Rahman, the working chairman of the BNP and the son of the BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia. Tarique is the main strategist of the Bangladesh's main opposition party. His discussions with Dr. Yunus have special importance in view of the impending elections.
As regards the stand of the opposition parties in Bangladesh, all the parties are preparing for the elections though the BNP still maintains that December is the best time since the months of February and March are not convenient in view of annual school examinations, Ramzan as also the possibility of sudden storms and incessant rains during those months. The Election Commission will take the final view on dates after looking at the representations.
For all parties, now one thing is certain that the national elections are taking place anytime between December and April and they would have to be fully ready for that. The EC will notify the lists of the parties eligible for taking part in the elections, but already, the trend is clear. Excepting the Awami League which has been barred by the law, all other parties including Jamaat El Islami are eligible to participate in the elections. There may be more than thirty political parties but the main parties presently are the frontrunner BNP, the newly set up the National Citizens Party (NCP) and Jamaat-El-Islami. Other smaller parties and loose fringe left combinations are there but they have not much influence in electoral terms in the present volatile Bangladesh.
To take the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) first. The BNP has been functioning in the parliamentary domain just few years after the founding of Bangladesh in 1971. The BNP's present chairperson Khaleda Zia was three times Prime Minister. She was out of the country for medical treatment. She came back last month and is now presiding over the strategy meetings though she has been asked by the doctors not to take strain of campaigning. So she is not campaigning much but guiding the local leadership in consultations with her son Tarique who is based in London. Tarique will be back to Dhaka as soon as the pending cases against him are disposed of in courts in Bangladesh.
BNP has governing experience for a long period. The party has contacts with the bureaucrats as also a major section of the Bangladesh army. BNP can be called a centre-right party in Bangladesh. The party is flexible and the top leadership understands the importance of having friendly relations with such a powerful neighbour like India. BNP took a vehement anti-India position during Sheikh Hasina's tenure as the BNP thought that India was making use of Hasina to serve its interests and Hasina was sacrificing national interests to Indian government so that all her excesses are ignored by New Delhi. BNP leaders now express the view that they will like to have normal relations with India if they come back to power after the national elections.
The second visible political party is the NCP. The NCP was founded in the last week of February this year. Only more than three months have passed. The party has still to set up all its units in districts at village levels. The party as a whole has no governing experience. Most of their top leaders were the vanguard of the anti-discrimination movement which toppled Sheikh Hasina from power on August 5 last year. The NCP is an unwieldy combination of diverse forces from the secularist to fundamentalists, from pro-Chinese to libertarians. They have some experienced trade union workers as also peasant leaders. But basically, the NCP is led by young radicals who are dreamers and talk of a new Golden Bangladesh to be built on the basis equity.
The NCP is totally anti-India. The leadership feels that Indian government was fully responsible for all excesses of Awami League and along with Sheikh Hasina, Indian government led by Narendra Modi is also guilty. In fact NCP was most vocal in mentioning Indian role in Hasina's tenure to the international delegations which studied the anti-Hasina students movement. The NCP has now speeded up formation of its core committees for election purposes. The NCP is very much with Dr. Yunus in most of the programmes. The NCP looks at BNP as its main rival. NCP is also suspicious of Army role.
As regards Jamaat El Islami, the party has lot of dedicated workers. The party has lot of funds now after the Yunus regime withdrew earlier ban on foreign donations to it. The Jamaat on its own remains an insignificant force in elections. Earlier, it aligned with BNP and got some recognition, but right now, BNP and Jamaat are at loggerheads. Jamaat is supporting Dr. Yunus just like NCP. A section of Jamaat wants an understanding with the NCP but that may not fructify as the top leadership of NCP is against any dealing with Jamaat.
What is the political ambition of Dr. Yunus? This is also important. Dr. Yunus is 85 years old now. Despite giving threat of submitting resignation twice during his tenure, the Nobel Laureate is enjoying his time, say the sources. He will not mind being nominated President after the elections. But that depends on which combination comes to power after elections and what type of dealings take place. NCP and Jamaat will like Dr. Yunus to remain in political limelight, but will BNP agree? Dr. Yunus had connections earlier with Biden administration as he was known as a good friend of Clintons. But after the coming of Trump in the White House, Dr, Yunus lost that weight. He is now trying to establish fresh contacts with Trump advisers taking advantage of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi's latest embarrassing position vis a vis US administration over May 10 ceasefire.
How does India stand in this scenario? With Awami League not in the race for national elections, India has hardly any party among the contestants in which it can take interest. As regards Awami League, the leaders say that they will challenge the ban decision, but that may not make any impact as the law has been amended. AL leadership can draw global attention for holding fair elections with its participation with India's help, but the possibility of success is remote. Two international teams including members from the EU submitted reports accusing Sheikh Hasina regime of election frauds and excesses during July movement including unwarranted killings.
For the time being, Awami League leadership has very few options. Among the big nations, the U.S. is right now not interested in Bangladesh since it is too involved with other pressing issues. China is positioned against Awami League and it is presently doing very good business with the present Bangladesh regime. China has friends in both BNP and NCP. China's ambassador in Dhaka receives maximum visitors from the political parties now. China has its ambitions far more than the business in Bangladesh. The plan involves reactivating abandoned airports as also naval base in Chittagong. But China is not in a hurry. Beijing wants to win people's hearts through setting up a cluster of factories creating jobs and then working for its geo-political goals in Bangladesh which affect India.
How will Narendra Modi government plan to meet the challenge in Bangladesh? That is the big question. (IPA Service)

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

EU, Britain reach post-Brexit deal on Gibraltar Border
EU, Britain reach post-Brexit deal on Gibraltar Border

Al Etihad

time15 hours ago

  • Al Etihad

EU, Britain reach post-Brexit deal on Gibraltar Border

12 June 2025 00:14 BRUSSELS (WAM)The European Union (EU) and Britain have agreed on the status of the overseas territory of Gibraltar, facilitating border crossings and resolving years of political territory has had its border arrangements with Spain as a significant point of contention since the United Kingdom's decision to withdraw from the EU in Wednesday's agreement, arrivals at Gibraltar Airport will present their passports to both Gibraltarian and Spanish border British Foreign Office stated that this system mirrors the model used by French police at London's St. Pancras station, the terminus for the Eurostar service connecting Britain with mainland Europe. "We have reached an agreement which protects British sovereignty, supports Gibraltar's economy and allows businesses to plan for the long-term once again," British Foreign Minister David Lammy said.

Could David Cameron be prosecuted for threatening the ICC?
Could David Cameron be prosecuted for threatening the ICC?

Middle East Eye

time18 hours ago

  • Middle East Eye

Could David Cameron be prosecuted for threatening the ICC?

David Cameron, the former British foreign secretary, may be liable for prosecution under international law and within the UK for his attempts to obstruct the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC), experts have said. Middle East Eye revealed on Monday that Cameron privately threatened Karim Khan, the British chief prosecutor at the ICC, in April 2024 to defund and withdraw from the ICC if it issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. "A threat against the ICC, direct or indirect, is an obstruction of justice," Francesca Albanese, the UN's special rapporteur on Palestine, told MEE's live show on Tuesday. "It's incredibly serious that someone in a position of power might have had the audacity to do that." And Professor Sergey Vasiliev of the Open University of the Netherlands reacted: "If the reports are confirmed, David Cameron did cross the legal line when he threatened the Prosector with all kinds of consequences for applying for the warrants. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters "This is a serious matter that shows Cameron's utter lack of respect for the ICC's judicial and prosecutorial independence." What did David Cameron do? Cameron, then foreign secretary in Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, made the threat on 23 April 2024 during a heated phone call with Khan. Cameron told Khan that the UK would "defund the court and withdraw from the Rome Statute" if the ICC issued warrants for Israeli leaders. At the time, Khan and his team of lawyers were preparing arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his then-defence minister, Yoav Gallant, as well as for Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh and Mohammed Deif. Khan's office applied for warrants on 20 May, less than a month after the phone call. 'Per the reported dialogue, David Cameron clearly seeks to pressure the ICC Prosecutor's decision regarding whether to pursue warrants for Israeli officials' - Professor Tom Dannenbaum Six months later, on 21 November, the warrants were approved by a panel of judges, officially charging Netanyahu and Gallant with war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Gaza since October 2023. MEE revealed details of the call based on information from several sources, including former staff in Khan's office familiar with the conversation and who have seen the minutes of the meeting. Cameron, a former British prime minister who was appointed foreign secretary by Sunak in November 2023, told Khan that applying for warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant would be "like dropping a hydrogen bomb". He said Khan was "on the brink of making a huge mistake" and that "the world is not ready for this". The report has drawn condemnation from British MPs who called for an investigation into Cameron's actions. Cameron has not responded to multiple requests for comment. Approached by MEE for a response to the exchange with Cameron, Khan said on Monday: "I have no comment to make at this time." What's the background to David Cameron's demands? The Conservative government was accused last year of being behind the delay in the ICC's issuance of arrest warrants against Israeli and Hamas officials, after filing a request with the pre-trial chamber to challenge the court's jurisdiction on Israeli nationals. The request prompted dozens of submissions from other states, but was later dropped by the Labour government, which came to power in July 2024. The revelations about Cameron came after the administration of US President Donald Trump said last week that it would sanction four ICC judges for investigations into the US and its ally Israel. In February, Khan was the first ICC official to be the target of US sanctions, carried out under an executive order issued shortly after Trump took office. The revelations also follow Khan's decision to take a leave of absence pending a UN-led investigation into alleged sexual misconduct, an accusation denied by his lawyers. What are the legal risks for Cameron? The ICC, established by the Rome Statute in 2002, is the only permanent international court that prosecutes individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. It has 125 signatories, including the UK and all EU countries, though Hungary has officially begun the withdrawal process. Leading international law experts have told Middle East Eye that Cameron's behaviour is an attack on judicial independence, and is prohibited under the Rome Statute and British law as an obstruction of justice. Professor Tom Dannenbaum of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy said that, in general, the UK is entitled to withdraw from the ICC, and, upon exit, would then cease its financial contribution. Exclusive: David Cameron threatened to withdraw UK from ICC over Israel war crimes probe Read More » Additionally, as a state party to the Rome Statute, the UK can advocate budget cuts within the Assembly of States Parties, the court's governing body, without having to pull out. But, he said, the issue here arises before any such withdrawal or defunding. "The problem here is David Cameron's reported threat to condition possible UK action or inaction in those respects on the decisions of the ICC Prosecutor regarding whom to investigate and prosecute," said Dannenbaum. "That threat is deeply concerning. The rule of law depends on prosecutors' insulation from political pressure in their identification of individuals for investigation and prosecution,. That is true at the ICC just as it is in domestic systems of criminal justice." Under what law could Cameron be charged? The four experts MEE spoke to said the ICC could charge Cameron, given the nature of the phone call with Khan, based on Article 70 of the Rome Statute, which prohibits offences against the administration of justice. These include "impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; and retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official." Dannenbaum argued that Cameron's threat to withdraw the UK from the ICC and defund the court may amount to "corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of … persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties". Although this particular provision has never been litigated before the ICC, Dannenbaum said, the relevant offence of "corruptly influencing a witness" has. "That case law indicates that 'corruptly influencing' includes 'pressuring' the protected person in a way 'capable of influencing the nature' of their contribution and thereby 'compromising' it, with the term 'corruptly' signifying the aim of 'contaminating' the person's contribution," Dannenbaum explained. "Per the reported dialogue, David Cameron clearly seeks to pressure the ICC Prosecutor's decision regarding whether to pursue warrants for Israeli officials. It is possible that this pressure would be understood to have been designed to 'contaminate' the Prosecutor's decision, although that concept may be less clear here than it is in the context of witness testimony. "Considerations regarding state withdrawal and budget cuts are plausibly 'capable' of influencing such decisions, albeit that the Prosecutor appears to have resisted the pressure in the case at hand." Given the above points, Dannenbaum concluded that Cameron's conduct may be consistent with the prohibited offences against the administration of justice listed under Article 70. The court has jurisdiction over Article 70 offences, irrespective of the nationality or location of the accused. What penalty could Cameron face? If successfully charged, Cameron is likely to face an arrest warrant by the court and, if convicted, could be sentenced to up to five years of imprisonment in The Hague or a fine. However, given the vulnerability of the ICC, with Trump's sanctions and Khan's leave of absence, Vasiliev suggested that Cameron's prosecution in The Hague would be "rather unlikely. "The ICC could in principle open the investigation into these allegations under Article 70 or request the UK to do so (or the UK could do so on its own). Whether this will in fact be done, is a big question." Could Cameron be prosecuted in the UK? Toby Cadman, a British barrister and international law expert, said that if the allegations are substantiated by clear evidence, then Cameron could be investigated at an international and domestic level "provided there's political will". Francesca Albanese: David Cameron could be criminally liable for threatening ICC Read More » In the UK, an investigation could be opened for the common law offence of obstruction or perverting the course of justice or the common law offence of misconduct in public offence, he said. An investigation in the UK can be carried out in accordance with Section 54 of the ICC Act 2001, which is based on Article 70 of the Rome Statute. The attorney general's consent would be required for any prosecution to go ahead. "It is quite clear that the allegation is serious and if the UK is committed to maintaining a system based on the rule of law with full respect for the state's international treaty obligations it should open an investigation and if the evidence supports it, bring charges," Cadman told MEE. Could Cameron be prosecuted outside the UK? But Vasiliev suggested that Cameron's prosecution before the courts of other states would be precluded by his functional immunity - the protection granted to senior officials if an alleged offence was committed during their official duties. "Cameron has a functional immunity for that act as he uttered those threats in the exercise of his official functions, and there is no exception to such immunity applicable in foreign courts for offences against the integrity of judicial system," Vasiliev argued. "The prosecution authorities of other states parties therefore will not eagerly pursue such a case."

Francesca Albanese: David Cameron could be criminally liable for threatening ICC
Francesca Albanese: David Cameron could be criminally liable for threatening ICC

Middle East Eye

timea day ago

  • Middle East Eye

Francesca Albanese: David Cameron could be criminally liable for threatening ICC

On Monday, Middle East Eye revealed that former British Foreign Secretary David Cameron privately threatened to defund and withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC) if it issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. Cameron, then foreign secretary in Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, made the threat in April 2024 in a heated phone call with Karim Khan, the British chief prosecutor of the court. Since then, 10 British MPs have commented on the revelation. Some have called for a parliamentary investigation, while others have urged the Labour government to distance itself from Cameron's actions. On Tuesday afternoon, Humza Yousaf, who was Scotland's first minister when Cameron made the threat, said that it was "shameful that Lord Cameron allegedly threatened the ICC for having the audacity to do their job". Now, legal experts say there is a serious risk that Cameron, who sits as a Tory peer in the House of Lords, could be criminally liable. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Francesca Albanese, the prominent legal scholar and UN special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, weighed in on Tuesday evening in an exclusive interview with MEE. Albanese, an expert in international law, was careful to note that she is not conversant with all the details of the Cameron story. She caveated her comments by saying, "if this occurred and there is evidence". The UN rapporteur explained that if Cameron acted as MEE's sources said he did, the former foreign secretary and prime minister has committed a "criminal offence under the Rome Statute". The Rome Statute criminalises those who attempt to prevent war crimes from being prosecuted. Article 70 awards the ICC jurisdiction over those responsible for "impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties". According to MEE's sources in The Hague, Cameron told the ICC prosecutor that if the ICC issued warrants for Israeli leaders, the UK would "defund the court and withdraw from the Rome Statute". Cameron did not respond to multiple requests for comment. 'The court can take action' "A threat against the ICC, direct or indirect, is an obstruction of justice," Albanese told MEE. "It's an action aimed at preventing the court from carrying out an investigation. So it's a violation of the principle of judicial independence. "It's incredibly serious that someone in a position of power might have had the audacity to do that." Exclusive: David Cameron threatened to withdraw UK from ICC over Israel war crimes probe Read More » Albanese pointed out that "any form of intimidation, retaliation, or interference with court officials is an offence in itself". Significantly, she said that the "court can take action against a person who misbehaves or obstructs proceedings." Cameron could also face potential repercussions under British domestic law. Section 54 (1) of the International Criminal Court Act 2001 notes: "A person intentionally committing any of the acts mentioned in article 70.1 (offences against the administration of justice in relation to the ICC) may be dealt with as for the corresponding domestic offence committed in relation to a superior court in England and Wales." Albanese said that if Cameron was still in politics, "there would be condemnations from other states, probably diplomatic or retaliatory measures. "Now, I don't know the UK system enough, but in normal systems, had he still been in office, there could have been an investigation, legal challenges by civil society - surely something that will happen. "And again, I don't know. One needs to see the UK legislation, but surely there could be something that is along these general principles." 'Cameron must be investigated' In the call on 23 April, Cameron told Khan that applying for warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant would be "like dropping a hydrogen bomb". He said Khan was "on the brink of making a huge mistake" and that "the world is not ready for this". According to MEE's sources, the foreign secretary spoke aggressively and repeatedly shouted over Khan, who had to ask to be able to complete his points. 'Any form of intimidation, retaliation, or interference with court officials is an offence' - Francesca Albanese Labour MP Naz Shah called the news "shocking" and said she would be "raising this matter directly" with the Foreign Office. Labour MP Zarah Sultana said on social media platform X that "David Cameron - and every UK minister complicit in arming and enabling Israel's genocide in Gaza - must be investigated for war crimes." Independent MP Ayoub Khan told MEE: "I urge the relevant parliamentary standards committees to investigate this matter with the seriousness it deserves." Emily Thornberry, a senior Labour MP and the chair of parliament's foreign affairs select committee, said: "I've always believed that when making difficult decisions, international law must always be our guide." Approached by MEE for a response to the exchange with Cameron, Khan said on Monday: "I have no comment to make at this time."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store