How Bangladesh elections without the Awami League will be a democratic farce

First Post

17 hours ago

Without the Awami League, the upcoming elections will not be a celebration of democracy but a cautionary tale of how 'revolutions', even though born in the name of reform, can lose their way read more
The boat is the political symbol of the Awami League, which is the largest and the founding party of Bangladesh. Image: AFP
The political future of Bangladesh hangs in the balance, and not because elections have been announced. Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel laureate turned interim leader, declared during his Eid-ul-Azha address that national elections will take place in the first half of April 2026. On the surface, it sounds like a democratic milestone in a country recovering from mass protests and a regime change. But scratch beneath the surface, and a far more troubling picture emerges—one in which the absence of the Awami League, Bangladesh's most historically significant party, raises urgent questions about the legitimacy and intent behind this proposed democratic exercise.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The Shadow of 1971
The Awami League is more than just a political party. It is inseparable from the very founding of Bangladesh. It was under the leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, its founding leader, that Bangladesh was born in 1971 after a brutal liberation war against Pakistan. To ban such a party outright—no matter how controversial its recent leadership—undermines the entire premise of inclusive democratic politics in the country. When Yunus's interim government invoked the Anti-Terrorism Act to outlaw the Awami League and cited the deaths of over 1,400 people during the 2024 protests as justification, the move drew international condemnation and domestic concern.
Even more troubling is the expansion of the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act (ICT Act) to allow entire political entities to be held collectively accountable. Such legal overreach sets a dangerous precedent and calls into question whether the rule of law is being used for justice—or for political vengeance.
Yunus's Promises vs Political Realities
Yunus came to power in August 2024 amidst chaos: the ouster of long-serving Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, violent crackdowns on student-led protests, and public fury over a job reservation system perceived as nepotistic. Initially hailed as a technocrat with integrity, Yunus promised a three-point agenda—reform, justice, and elections. He accused past governments of running 'fascist regimes' and declared that flawed elections were responsible for Bangladesh's cyclical crises since independence.
But his critics argue that these high-minded goals are being used to mask a consolidation of power. There has been a consistent delay in announcing a clear electoral roadmap, and his administration has taken controversial foreign policy positions—such as backing the Chittagong-to-Rakhine corridor project, opposed by the army and most major parties. These distractions seem to deviate from what should be the interim government's singular mission: holding credible, timely elections and transferring power.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Army's Red Line and Political Fracturing
Pressure is mounting from all sides, especially the military. In an unprecedented move, Army Chief General Waker-Uz-Zaman issued a public ultimatum, demanding elections be held by December 2025. He accused Yunus of interfering in military matters, attempting to engineer leadership changes within the armed forces, and delaying elections for personal or external agendas. Tensions boiled over during a Durbar meeting where Waker, flanked by officers in combat uniform, questioned Yunus's democratic mandate and commitment to national security.
The military's growing impatience is echoed by almost all major political players. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), seen as the frontrunner if elections are held soon, has accused Yunus of stalling. Even the Communist Party of Bangladesh (CPB) and the newly formed National Citizens Party (NCP)—despite its proximity to the interim regime—expressed conditional support for the April 2026 timeline, contingent on the implementation of key reforms outlined in the 'July Charter' and 'July Declaration'.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The Risk of a 'King's Party'
The rise of the National Citizens Party, a student-led movement that was at the forefront of Hasina's ouster, initially energised youth politics. But its close alignment with the interim regime has earned it the label of 'king's party'. Tensions between the BNP and NCP have already resulted in dozens of deaths in street clashes. Moreover, the NCP's willingness to cooperate with the government even as the Awami League remains banned raises concerns about selective inclusivity and manufactured consent.
Furthermore, the NCP's alliance with radical Islamist student groups and its push to replace Bangladesh's secular 1972 Constitution have alarmed the military and moderate political actors alike. The army, which identifies deeply with the legacy of the Liberation War, has made clear that any deviation toward Islamist or authoritarian rule is a red line.
Foreign Policy Missteps and Internal Discontent
Yunus's foreign policy gaffes have only compounded his domestic troubles. His comment in China suggesting that Northeast India is 'landlocked' and that Bangladesh serves as its 'guardian of the ocean' provoked a diplomatic backlash. His support for Chinese investment and controversial infrastructure projects like the Rakhine Corridor have further alienated India and emboldened internal critics who accuse him of compromising national sovereignty.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Even more awkward was his personal request to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to prevent Sheikh Hasina from speaking publicly while in exile—a request Modi reportedly declined. His subsequent comments attacking Indian media for allegedly spreading 'fake news' have not helped ease tensions.
Legitimacy in Question
For any election to be legitimate, it must be inclusive, transparent, and timely. The announced April 2026 timeline fails on at least two of those fronts. It is not timely—dozens of parties, including the BNP and CPB, have demanded elections by December 2025. And it is not inclusive—the exclusion of the Awami League renders the entire process questionable at best, a sham at worst.
Yunus's promise of holding 'the most beautiful election ever' rings hollow in the face of these exclusions and delays. The notion that the Awami League is no longer a 'political party' but a criminal organisation, as Yunus claims, is not a legal or moral argument—it is a political one, and a dangerous one at that. It shuts the door on reconciliation, pluralism, and democratic norms.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
What Lies Ahead
Bangladesh stands at a crossroads. Either the interim government course-corrects and ensures an inclusive, fair election before the military's deadline of December 2025, or the country risks a deeper descent into instability. If Yunus persists in sidelining key political players, alienating the military, and engaging in geopolitical adventurism, he may find himself not the harbinger of reform but the architect of yet another failed transition.
A truly democratic Bangladesh cannot be built on the exclusion of its founding political party, however flawed its recent leadership might appear to be. Legitimacy cannot be proclaimed—it must be earned through action, transparency, and inclusion. Without the Awami League, the upcoming elections will not be a celebration of democracy but a cautionary tale of how 'revolutions', even though born in the name of reform, can lose their way.
The author is Associate Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies & Analyses (MP-IDSA). Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD