Flouting electoral law

The Representation of the People Order (RPO), 1972 did not contain any provision for submission of return of expenditure by the political parties fielding candidates in general elections. Representation of the People (Amendment) Ordinance, 2001, promulgated during the period of the caretaker government (CTG) further amending the 1972 RPO, made provision for submission of return of election expenditure by every political party nominating any candidate for general elections to the EC through the ROs concerned. The amendment, inserting Articles 44CC and 44CCC after Article 44C of the original Order aims at making election expenditures of political parties fielding candidates in general elections transparent. The CTG of 2001 thus deserves congratulations for the said amendment.

The salient points of the new Articles 44CC and 44CCC are mentioned below.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Article 44CC

-- Maintaining by a political party setting up any candidate for election a proper account of all its income and expenditure for the period from the date of declaring the election schedule till the completion of elections in all the constituencies in which it has set up candidates and such account showing clearly the amount received by it as donation above TK 1,000 from any candidate or any other person seeking nomination or from any other person or source.

-- Depositing moneys of every political party in its account maintained in any scheduled bank.

-- No expending by any political party during the election period for election purposes, including election expenses for the contesting candidates set up by it, an amount exceeding Tk 1.50 crore where the number of its candidates is more than two hundred; -- Tk 1.00 crore where the number of candidates is more than one hundred but not more than two hundred; Tk 0.75 crore where the number of candidates is not more than one hundred.

-- Restricting receipt by any political party any donation amounting to more than Tk 1,000 unless it is made by cheque.

Contravention of any of the above provisions is punishable with fine which may extend to Tk 10 lakh.

Article 44CCC

-- Submitting by a contesting political party to the ROs concerned, within sixty days of the completion of election in all constituencies, an expenditure statement giving details of the expenses incurred or authorised by it in connection with the election of its candidates for the period from the date declaring the election schedule till the completion of elections in all the constituencies in which it set up candidates.

-- Showing separately expenditure incurred on general propagation of the manifesto, policy aims and objects of the party and expenditure incurred or authorised in connection with the election of each of its contesting candidates.

-- Furnishing by every political party to the EC a separate statement certified as correct and complete by the secretary of the party showing the opening balance of the party funds on the date of declaring the election schedule, the closing balance of the funds on the date of completion of election in all constituencies and the total amount received by the party as donation or otherwise, during the period between the said two dates.

-- Forwarding by the ROs concerned the expenditure statements received by them to the EC together with the result of the scrutiny made by them in respect thereof.

It would appear from the above that a political party is punishable with a fine of maximum amount of Tk 10 lakh for contravention of any provision of Article 44CC. But Article 44CCC has not prescribed any punishment for contravening any of its provisions. This, however, cannot be an excuse for non-compliance of the provisions of law for submitting election expenditure statements and balance sheet of the party funds to the EC.

Now the questions arise as to why the political parties are flouting the provisions of the RPO for submitting election expenditure statements and balance sheets of the parties' funds to the EC; and what actions the EC have taken so far against the defaulting political parties.

It may not be very difficult to find answers to these questions.

First, our political parties that have ruled the independent Bangladesh so far have one thing in common and that is their avoidance of transparency, whether in politics or in governance. The ruling party/parties do not like framing transparent laws, rules, etc that obstruct their working at their own sweet will.

For understandable reasons, the AL that ruled Bangladesh for three plus years immediately after its independence did not take any initiative to frame Rules of Business (ROB) or Secretariat Instructions, the former constituting procedures of transaction of business of the government and allocation of functions among different ministries/divisions and the latter providing procedures for the disposal of business in the Bangladesh Secretariat, commonly known as the seat of the government. After 15 years of dictatorial military and presidential rules since August 15, 1975 the country got back parliamentary democracy in 1991.

The BNP and the AL that ruled the country in succession between March 1991 and July 2001 (excepting the CTG period between April 3, 1996 and June 23, 1996) did not take initiative to amend the 1972 RPO to make provisions for registration of political parties or for submission of election expenditure statements to the EC by the political parties that nominate candidates in the general elections. The simple reasons are: (i) they do not want transparency in the management and financing of their parties; and (ii) they want to avoid accountability.

In its election pledges of 2001, the BNP committed to take legal measures for disclosure of assets and properties of all elected people's representatives, including the prime minister, ministers and others with the rank and status of minister. But during the last four years and a half, the BNP-led alliance government has not taken any legal step towards that end. The lust for amassing wealth illegally by the people's representatives stands in the way to translate the commitment into reality.

Second, the provisions introduced by the CTG in the RPO for submitting election expenditure statements of the parties fielding candidates in the general elections and their balance sheets of funds between the date of declaring election schedule and the date of completion of election in all constituencies have not been liked by the political parties, including the BNP and the AL.

The expenditure limits of political parties for election purposes are far from the ground realities. While the major political parties, in particular the BNP and the AL, spend hundreds of crores of taka for election purposes, the electoral law permits expenditure of only Tk 1.50 crore by a political party nominating more than two hundred candidates. Failing to make a match between their actual expenses and the limits set by the electoral law for election purposes, the political parties prefer not to submit returns on their election expenditure to the EC.

Third, Article 44CCC of the amended RPO is silent about the punishment to be meted out to a political party fielding candidates in general election for its failure to submit to the ROs concerned (for onward transmission to the EC) election expenditure statements within sixty days of the completion of election in all constituencies and balance sheet of its funds between the date of declaring election schedule and the date of election in all constituencies to the EC. So, the political parties have not given any importance to the need for submission of aforesaid election expenditure statements and balance sheets of their funds to the EC. This speaks of the necessity for a further provision in the RPO for imposing a heavy fine on the defaulting political party/parties.

As for the second question regarding actions so far taken by the EC against the defaulting political parties, available information suggests that the actions taken by the EC so far are limited to issuing "a number of circulars asking the contesting political parties to submit the returns of their election expenditure." But none of the contesting political parties has responded. We have a divided EC for the last few years. The EC source suggests that the immediate past chief election commissioner (CEC) MA Syed did not convene any meeting of the commission to discuss the issue. The EC is in a mess under the incumbent CEC MA Aziz. So, ineffectiveness of the EC has provided a scope to the political parties nominating candidates in the general election of 2001 to flout the relevant provisions of the electoral law.

To conclude, respect for law and equality before law are important pre-conditions for functioning of a just and democratic society. By showing indifference to the provisions of the RPO for submitting election expenditure returns to the EC through the ROs concerned, the major political parties, including the BNP, AL, JP (Ershad) and Jamaat-e-Islami, have not only proved their unwillingness to be transparent in their election expenses, but also shown their disrespect for the law of the land. In the instant case, the ruling BNP has to set the example to be followed by others.

M. Abdul Latif Mondal is a former Secretary to the Government.