Electoral Management in Bangladesh and the USA: A Comparison between Their Guiding Principles   Hasibur Rahaman[*]   Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Gopalganj Science and Technology University, Gopalganj, Bangladesh.

 

Keywords		Abstract
Democracy, Election, Electoral Management, Guiding Principles, Bangladesh and USA		The topic aims to analyze and compare the electoral management systems in Bangladesh and the United States of America (USA). The study is examining the legal frameworks, institutional arrangements, actors and the role of technology in the electoral management process of both countries. By comparing both countries, the study is identifying the strengths and weaknesses of their respective electoral management process based on their guiding principles (independence, impartiality, integrity, transparency, accountability, efficiency, professionalism, and rule of law) and draw lessons for improving electoral integrity and democratic governance in Bangladesh. The research is based on a combination of desk research, interviews, and comparative analysis of electoral data. The study is relevant to academics, policymakers, civil society organizations, and electoral management bodies interested in promoting free and fair elections and democratic governance.

 

1. Introduction 

Democracy is inconceivable without a credible election. It is emphasized by the peoples because, people’s proper choice to hold the office of authority depends on the successful deliberation of the election (Hussain, 2008:1). In this regard, the institutional aspect of elections is inevitable. Through relevant institutional mechanisms, the individuals’ preferences are aggregated. In this respect, the role of the Electoral Management Body (EMB) is significant in holding a free, fair and credible election which are prerequisite to the institutionalization of democracy. Considering the importance of EMB, a constitutional body in the country would have effective functionality and strength to conduct the election without any interference from the other organs of the state. The EMB of developing countries has rarely been deemed as a credible institution. Bangladesh as a developing country has been affected by such a juncture. In this situation, Bangladesh failed to build viable political institutions after 52 years of independence. In the absence of viable political institutions democracy did not become institutionalized. Right or wrong allegations are raised against the Bangladesh government and Bangladesh Electoral Management Body (BEMB) for rigging elections and abusing power to influence election results. Usually, the incumbent party embarks on this kind of illegal activity. Political parties can unlawfully make the results in their favor in order to retain power. For example, the Awami League (AL) held an election in 1973 with horrific party assertions over the electoral process. From 1975-90 Bangladesh was ruled by the military or civil-military government. In the period of military and civil-military governments, most of the elections were held for legitimizing or demilitarizing power. Even in democratic regimes the party in power is criticized to have rigged elections followed by violence which has far-reaching negative political consequences (Rahaman et al., 2013: 95).

 

The Bangladesh Constitution gives the provision for setting up an Independent Election Commission to conduct elections in the country. As Article 118 of the Bangladesh Constitution established an Independent EMB that operates the legal functions of election law. Article 118 (1) mentioned that “there shall be an Election Commission for Bangladesh consisting of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and more than four Election Commissioners. The appointment of the CEC and other Election Commissioners (if any) shall, subject to the provisions of any law made on that behalf, be made by the President” (Rahaman et al., 2013: 95). When the EC consists of more than one person, the CEC is to act as its chairman. The term of office of an Election Commissioner shall be five years from the date on which he enters his office. Article 118 (3) of the constitution clearly states “a person who has held office as CEC shall not be eligible for appointment in service of the Republic and any other Commissioner shall, on ceasing to hold office as such, be eligible for appointment as CEC but shall not be otherwise eligible for appointment in the service of the Republic” (Rahaman et al., 2013: 95). The EC conducted several elections. However, the BEC has rarely been considered a credible institution. Right or wrong allegations against BEC have some irregularities in the way of holding elections and partial attitude to the political parties. Therefore, only three CEC completed their tenure. Some argues that despite a good number of laws and rules, the EC still lacks legal provisions in respect of enabling law for its establishment and structure like other constitutional bodies (Akram and Das, 2008:22). Behind such lack of the Election Commission, they mention that the EC does not have the authority to control the political parties, financial independence, and a proper mechanism for processing electoral disputes (Hussain, 2008). The making of electoral laws time-befitting and consonant with the demands of various quarters, the Election Commission would talk to political parties before making any amendment to the existing laws (Rahaman et al., 2013: 95). Electoral laws cannot be applied without the help of political parties. As in modern representative democracy, political parties are considered to be the heart of the political process (Rahaman, 2014:17).

 

The history of electoral management in the United States dates back to the ratification of the US Constitution in 1788, which established the framework for the country's federal system of government. The Constitution delegated responsibility for conducting elections to the individual states. As a result, the electoral management system in the USA is decentralized and governed by a complex set of federal and state laws and regulations. Over time, the US electoral management system has evolved in response to various political and social developments. For example, the 15th Amendment to the US Constitution ratified in 1870, prohibited states from denying the right to vote on the basis of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. The 19th Amendment, ratified in 1920, extended voting rights to women. In the wake of the disputed 1960 presidential election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was signed into law in response to widespread discrimination against African American voters, prohibited discriminatory practices such as literacy tests and provided federal oversight of election administration in certain jurisdictions. In the early 21st century, the administration of elections in the USA was once again thrust into the national spotlight following the disputed 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. In response to the controversies surrounding that election, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in 2002, which established the US Election Assistance Commission (EAC) as a federal agency to improve the administration of federal elections and provide resources and support to state and local election officials. The HAVA established the EAC and mandated the development of new voting system guidelines and standards. Since its creation, the EAC has played an important role in promoting best practices in election administration and supporting state and local election officials. The commission has developed voluntary voting system guidelines, certified voting systems, and provided training and technical assistance to election officials. The EAC has also administered grants to support election administration at the state and local levels, and it serves as a clearinghouse for election-related information and research. Overall, the historical background of the electoral management system in the USA reflects a complex and dynamic system that has evolved over time in response to changing social and political circumstances. The decentralization of election administration to the states and the creation of the EAC reflect the unique challenges and opportunities of USA democracy, and the ongoing efforts to ensure the integrity and accessibility of the electoral process. 

 

In this context, the present research is planned through which the electoral management process of Bangladesh and the USA is compared. The main question of this study is “How do the Electoral Management Bodies of Bangladesh and the USA perform, despite having different political legacies?” The present research focuses on the performances of the Electoral Management Bodies of Bangladesh and the USA on the basis of their guiding principles.

 

2. Significance

Electoral management is a crucial component of democratic governance and sustainable development. By analyzing the electoral management practices in Bangladesh and the USA, this research can contribute to broader debates on the role of electoral processes in promoting democratic governance and sustainable development in different contexts. The comparative analysis of electoral management practices in Bangladesh and the USA can help inform policy and practice in both countries. This topic provides an opportunity to compare and contrast electoral management practices in two countries with very different political systems, historical contexts, and institutional arrangements. Such a comparative analysis can help identify common challenges and best practices in electoral management, as well as the unique strengths and weaknesses of each country's electoral system. The research findings are used to develop evidence-based policies and practices for electoral management, which can improve the integrity and effectiveness of electoral processes in both countries. The comparative analysis of electoral management practices in Bangladesh and the USA provides an opportunity for cross-national learning and knowledge transfer. The comparison of the two countries is help identify best practices, challenges, and areas of improvement for electoral management in each country. Overall, the research topic on electoral management in Bangladesh and the USA is significant for its potential to generate new insights and knowledge on an important aspect of democratic governance, and for its potential to inform policy and practice in both countries and beyond.

 

3. Conceptual Clarification and Underpins

3.1 Democracy 

Defining democracy is a big challenge. It is subjected to a variety of interpretations. However, there is no controversy; democracy was first invented in Greek. Greek democracy was direct. But in the modern world, direct democracy is impossible due to the rise of big states or nation-states. Even if there has been also a representative democracy in ancient times, particularly in Germany, Holland, and Hungary (Ali, 1996). Some argued representative democracy originated in the Middle Ages as a device to select the members of certain bodies consulted by the king on some important issues. The concept of modern representative democracy, it comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein voters choose (in free, secret, multi-party elections) representatives to act in their interests, but not as their proxies—i.e., not necessarily as directed but with enough authority to exercise initiative in the face of changing circumstances. Modern liberal democracies are important examples of representative democracy. It could be argued that this term is synonymous with “republic.’’ In defining representative democracy, James Madison said that by delegating government to a small number of citizens ‘whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country--the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves’ (Mannan, 2005). By defining representative democracy, W.F. Willoughby makes a valuable comment- “representation in government is regarded today as a process whereby individuals within the state can upon discussion and position to those in office. Instead of government officials being virtual representatives, they are considering ‘responsible’ representatives” (David, 2005). 

 

3.2 Election 

The election can mean different things, depending on the political culture of the country. But the true meaning of the word can only be realized where there is real democracy. Thus, the election is a process in which a vote is held to elect candidates to office. It is the mechanism by which democracy fills elective offices in the legislature. The word ‘election’ has been defined by both a wide and a narrow meaning. In the narrow sense, it is used to mean the final selection of a candidate which may embrace the result of the poll when there is polling or a particular candidate being returned unopposed when there is no poll. In the wide sense, the word is used to connote the entire process culminating in a candidate being declared elected (Rahaman, 2014). Harrop and Miller defined “election as a force of party activities to intensify political awareness of the people. As such the educated voters, provide the foundations for representation and grant legitimacy to the government” (Harrop and Miller, 1998: 245). The concept of free and fair carries a special meaning in politics, especially in electoral politics. It is used as an adjective to describe the credibility of an election. Whether an election was free and fair means whether the voters were allowed to exercise their right of franchise in an environment free from all kinds of pressure, intimidation, obstruction, influence, force, coercion, violence, or any means that could unduly influence their decision to vote or to cast their votes for a particular candidate. Free and fair also encompasses the way an election is administered by the authorities (Rahaman, 2014). The whole process involved in an election falls within its scope. Each stage of the election process should be in accordance with the law, or in the absence of law, by past precedents or tradition, and must be free, fair as well as transparent (Karim, 2004). In this research, election means making political choices by voting through free fair means. It is accommodative of the individuals’ share in the power process and thus the governmental process.

 

3.3 Electoral Management

Elections are complex and specialized processes (Rahaman, 2014). This process is managed by a body or bodies with specific electoral management responsibilities. So, specialized skills are necessary for electoral management bodies. Thus, electoral management means bringing together the knowledge and expertise relating to the electoral activities of EMB, their roles, and functions, their organization, financing, and management of election administration. It also focuses on the institutional structure of EMB, its administrative infrastructure, and its external environment. Electoral management refers to three types of models. The Independent Model of Electoral Management, The Government Model of Electoral Management, and the Mixed Model of Electoral Management. The Independent Model of Electoral Management exists in those countries where elections are conducted and managed by an EMB which is institutionally independent and autonomous from the executive branch of government, and which has managed its own budget. An Independent Model of EMB is not accountable to a government ministry or department. It may be accountable to the legislature, the judiciary, or the head of the state (President). The Governmental Model of Electoral Management exists in those countries where elections are conducted by the executive branch of the government through a ministry or through local authorities. This EMB operates under the executive branch at the national level and is answerable to a cabinet minister. The Mixed Model of Electoral Management has dual structures, one is a supervisory component of EMB that is independent of the executive branch of government (as an Independent Model) and the other is an implementation component of EMB that is located within a department of state or local government (as Governmental Model of EMB). 

 

The EMBs are not always clearly defined in legislation or correctly interpreted by the Constitution. To facilitate relevance and applicability, each of the three models is flexible enough to focus on what is relevant in a particular country and a particular electoral management context. Some countries follow the Independent Model, some Mixed Model, and some Governmental Model of electoral management. Bangladesh and India constitutionally follow the Independent Model of EMB. From the way they are functioning, it seems that they follow the Mixed Model. Three models are given in Figure 1 below:    

 

Figure: 1

Source: This figure has been modified from “Electoral Management Design, An Overview of the International IDEA Handbook,” (2006), IDEA, Stockholm, p. 5. 

The EMB is responsible for administering elections. It must honestly and impartially implement the procedures specified in the legal framework. This involves dealing with technical issues and making decisions. In some cases, it must also draft electoral regulations, and it usually develops procedures for voter and candidate registration, voting, and vote counting. To fulfill its primary role of holding free, fair, and credible elections, it can ensure the legitimacy of the processes for which electoral management is responsible. The electoral management process should be viewed by some its guiding principles like (1) independence, (2) impartiality, (3) integrity, (4) transparency, (5) accountability, (6) efficiency, (7) professionalism, and (8) rule of law in the electoral management process. 

 

3.4 The Interrelationship between the Concepts

Representative democracy, election, and electoral management are all interconnected concepts in the context of modern democratic societies. Representative democracy is a system of government where elected officials represent the interests and opinions of the people. Elections are a crucial aspect of representative democracy because they provide citizens with a means of selecting their representatives. Electoral management is the process of conducting elections, which includes everything from registering voters to counting ballots. It encompasses the planning, organization, and implementation of elections, and it is critical to ensuring that the election process is fair, transparent, and credible. In a representative democracy, electoral management is essential to the success of elections. A well-managed election ensures that citizens are able to vote in a free and fair environment, without coercion or manipulation. It also ensures that the results of the election accurately reflect the will of the people. The relationship between these concepts is such that representative democracy depends on the integrity of the election process. For example, if electoral management is weak, there is a risk that the election will be unfair or fraudulent, leading to the possibility that representatives may not truly reflect the will of the people. On the other hand, if the election is free and fair, citizens are more likely to trust their elected officials and have confidence in the democratic process. Therefore, electoral management is crucial to the functioning of representative democracy, as it ensures that elections are conducted in a transparent and credible manner. It is an essential part of the democratic process, and it plays a critical role in upholding the guiding principles of fairness, accountability, transparency, and so on in elections.

 

4. Hypotheses

From the above discussion of the subject of electoral management, the following hypotheses can be made, and based on these hypotheses, the present research can be conducted.

 

1. Having a different political legacy, the election management of the USA is functioning successfully compared to Bangladesh.
2. Through holding regular intervals of the election, the election management of the USA has been institutionalized.
3. The electoral management of Bangladesh has not been institutionalized due to repeated military intervention in politics.
4. There is political unwillingness under the democratic regime of Bangladesh to institutionalize the election management process.
5. There is a lack of willingness to ensure guiding principles in the electoral management process of Bangladesh.

 

5. Objectives

The main objective of this study is to explore how the electoral management process of Bangladesh and the USA performs in the context of the different political legacies. To attain this objective other substitute objectives can be mentioned here:

 

1. To examine the history of electoral management process of Bangladesh and the United State of America (USA).  
2. To know the application of the legal framework in the electoral management process of Bangladesh and the USA.
3. To measure the election management of Bangladesh and the USA based on their guiding principles.
4. To identify the critical areas of the election management process of Bangladesh and the USA from a comparative viewpoint and to find out the lessons relevant to Bangladesh. 

 

6. Methodology

The methodology applied in this study is a combination of historical and analytical approaches. A historical approach to our analysis of how election management procedures have evolved in Bangladesh and the USA. In this research, an analytical approach is used based on both qualitative data. The data has collected from secondary sources. In the first phase of secondary sources, a wide range of literature has been reviewed to conceptualize the subject matter. In this phase, data has collected through intellectual writings, different books, journals, and research papers relating to participation in elections to build a framework for the research. In the second phase of secondary source, data has collected from reports of governmental institutions and agencies relating to election law and regulation. A lack of reliable and impartial sources of data made the task of data collection very difficult. At such a juncture of the study, daily newspapers have widely used as the source of data.

 

7. Electoral Management in Bangladesh and USA: A Comparison

 

7.1 Independence

The meaning of “independence is still not clear in election administration. However, the term ‘independence’ encompasses two different concepts: structural independence of EMB from government and fearless independence from not only government but also from political or other partisan influences. Structural independence is formal and the other is normative or informal” (Rahaman, 2014:11). According to structural independence, the election process and administration are defined how the election process and administration are perceived to be designed, managed and implemented. Informal independence of EMB is fearless independence from not only government but also from political or other partisan influences. It largely depends on ethical standards of polling personnel. 

 

The EMB is constitutionally independent. In accordance with the Article 118 of the Constitution, the EMB is independent in the exercise of its functions. The RPO 1972 has also empowered the EMB to undertake wide-ranging functions. However, “the EMB still lacks an overarching law, which clearly states the powers of the EMB in relation to the government and an unambiguous mechanism if the Government fails to comply with or distorts the implementation of the EMB’s directives” (Hasan, 2010) Therefore, the EMB faces difficulty at various levels while implementing its plans and programmes. The EMB has to interact with the bureaucracy for election activities. Under the present dispensation the Secretariat of the EMB is a division in the PMO’s office which ex facie negates its independence. The EMB needs to have power to appoint RO, PO and Polling officers whose independence must be secured, and where staff is provided on deputation such staff must be exclusively subject to the direction and control of the EMB free from any interference from the executive (Hossain, 2006). However, the newly adopted Election Commission Secretariat Ordinance 2009 places the Secretariat under the control of the EMB. According to this law, the deputed officials are not considered as officials of the Secretariat of EMB.

 

Some specific areas of dependence of ECB are mentioned here: (1) Appointment of the CEC and other EMBs depend on the commitment of the government. CEC and other ECs are appointed for five years by the President being advised by the Prime Minister. Therefore, in absence of any law framed under the Constitution for the selection of CEC and ECs entire business rests on the government. (2) The EMB is dependent on bureaucracy in conducting the election. Article 7 of the RPO authorizes the EC to appoint ROs and AROs from among government officials. According to the law, the EMB has the authority to withdraw any officer during election. To do that the EMB has to request the concerned Ministry to initiate disciplinary action against such polling personnel for negligence of duties including other forms of misconduct. (3) The EMB has to depend on PSC for recruitment of first-class officers (Upazila Election Officer). (4) To prepare the electoral roll the EMB has to involve huge machinery to complete it. Apart from the EMB’s regular staff, a large number of government officials are involved in this process. The Upazilla Nirbahi Officer (UNO) generally works as a coordinator in Voter Registration Committee at Upazilla level. Before the appointment of Upazila Election Officer (UEO), the Assistant Commissioner (AC) (Land) acted as the UEO besides his regular work. Even after the appointment of 300 UEOs, in more than 150 Upazillas the AC (Land) still serves as the UEO in those Upazillas. The newly appointed UEO is not competent enough to act as the UEO. (5) To maintain law and order in election the EMB has to depend on law enforcement agencies. Sometimes the EMB has to depend on armed forces also. The deployment and refusal of deployment of law enforcement agencies and armed forces obviously depend on the commitment of the ruling party and government. (6) To conduct the election in each polling center in Election Day the EMB has to appoint PO from the first- and second-class officers of government, semi-government offices, autonomous institutions and educational institutions. As an informal independence, moral standard of polling personnel depends on their educational background, social beliefs and values. Unfortunately, due to low political culture over the years, to a great extent, larger parts of the civil administration have been politicized in such a manner that there are political divisions within the administration. This politicization leads the polling personnel to be devoted to certain political parties. They do not act with neutrality, as they are morally obliged to certain ideologies. As such, they act in a partisan manner by favoring same ideological political parties and candidates.

 

The independence of electoral management in the United States is a critical aspect of the country's democratic process. It involves various layers of government, and its degree can vary from state to state. Here are key aspects of the independence of electoral management in the USA.

 

The USA follows a decentralized system of election administration, where each state is responsible for organizing and overseeing its own elections. This decentralization means that state governments have significant control over election rules, procedures, and the appointment of election officials. In most states, election administration is overseen by state-level election commissions or boards. These entities are responsible for managing voter registration, overseeing the conduct of elections, and certifying election results. The degree of independence of these boards can vary depending on state laws and regulations. In some states, election officials, such as Secretaries of State, are elected positions and can be affiliated with political parties. In others, election officials may be appointed on a non-partisan basis. While election administration is primarily a state-level responsibility, there is some federal oversight and regulation. The USA Election Assistance Commission (EAC) provides guidance and resources to states but does not have direct authority over election management. The legal frameworks governing elections, including rules on voter registration, ballot access, and campaign finance, can be influenced by the political dynamics within each state. State legislatures often have the authority to make changes to these frameworks. The independence of the judiciary plays a vital role in the U.S. electoral system. Courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, can hear cases related to election laws and ensure their constitutionality (Alvarez, R. M., & Grofman, B., 2014). Independent organizations and watchdog groups play a crucial role in advocating for voter rights and monitoring the electoral process. They often raise concerns about issues such as voter suppression and gerrymandering. The U.S. system of government is designed with a system of checks and balances, where different branches of government, as well as independent entities, play a role in safeguarding the integrity of elections.

 

While the U.S.A election management system does have a decentralized nature and variations in the level of independence of election officials from state to state, it also includes mechanisms for legal recourse and avenues for advocacy by civil society organizations and citizens (Alvarez, R. M., & Grofman, B.,2014). The extent to which electoral management in the United States remains independent is an ongoing subject of debate and legal challenges, especially in instances where partisan politics may influence election administration decisions.

 

7.2 Impartiality

“The role of EMB must be impartial of conducting the election. Because, an EMB is constitutionally responsible for conducting an impartial election, impartial treatment of political parties is required. Impartiality is also required for the recruitment of personnel of an EMB” (Rahaman, 2014:11). Unfortunately, Bangladesh Electoral Management Body (BEMB) often does not have the political neutrality to ensure free and fair election. It is also painful fact that the role of BEMB stakeholders is politically biased in this respect. Impartiality is also required for the recruitment of the personnel of an EMB. According to the Article 118(1) of the constitution, appointments of CEC and other ECs as senior constitutional positions, the President acts on the advice of the Prime Minister under Article 48(3) of the Constitution. This arrangement provides the opportunity for politicizing appointments of the CEC and ECs. “In absence of any law framed under the Constitution for selection of the Commission entire business rests on the government of the day, be it of any form. In parliamentary form of government that was instituted since 1991. It is the Prime-Minister who would recommend the names for such appointments to the president who being party loyalist remains obliged to endorse the recommendation. More often than not such appointment was fraught to be made upon partisan views. In most cases it proved to be so. One such example was appointment of Justice MA Aziz. His appointment by the then president was challenged in the court which added to the negative image of the Commission. Along with him the other appointments, especially the appointment of immediate past secretary to the Commission Mr. Zakaria as one of the Commissioners, who was perceived to have been protégée of then ruling BNP government. The present Election Commission is also perceived to have been protégée of present government” (Hossain, 2011:23). Article 118 (4) of the Constitution provides that “the EC shall be independent in exercising of its functions and subject only to this constitution and any other law”. Article 126 of the Constitution and Articles 4 and 5 of the RPO, 1972 also provide that “it shall be the duty of all executive authorities to assist the EC in the discharge of its functions.” The Election Commission has a power to require any persons or authority to perform such functions in the election. In the same vein, Article 58D (1) of the Constitution directs to the incumbent government to “give to the EC all possible aid and assistance that may be required for holding the general election of members of parliament peacefully, fairly and impartially.” Article 7 of the RPO, authority is vested on Commission to appoint ROs and AROs for one or number of constituencies. For all national elections, ROs and AROs are appointed from the government officials. Therefore, the neutral role of ROs and AROs are very important in conducting election. “The most important appointment is that of the RO at the constituency or administrative district level and ARO at Upazilla level who, under the law, given with enormous power in the conduct of election and superintendence on behalf of the EC. In fact, it is the ROs who were the final authority in acceptance or rejection of the nomination paper under the law. In RPO Article 14 (5), till the recent amendment made, a candidate could appeal to the Commission only on rejection by the RO but no appeal to the Commission was allowed by law for immediate remedy against acceptance of a nomination paper even if such candidate had elements of disqualification. Therefore, any partisan views or behavior or favoritism and nepotism can put the entire process under serious question” (Hossain, 2011:23). “There are some other impediments in the way of holding free and fair election like creation of a neutral atmosphere for all political parties and candidates during election. The political activists in favor of their candidates try to give bribes to the voters and may also terrorize the voters by compelling them to cast their vote during election. Therefore, the voters may cast their votes by taking bribes and being terrorized. Use of illegal arms in attacking and counter attacking processions of opposing groups, intimidating rival supporters, creating terrorism among voters to discourage them from casting their votes, hijacking ballot boxes or ballot papers are some of the negative aspects in the electoral process. Intimidating of minority and female voters is also a common phenomenon in Bangladesh. Therefore, time has demanded promulgation of some stringent codes of conduct to refrain the political parties and candidates from indulging in such mal-practices” (Rahaman, 2014:11).

 

Impartiality are also important to solve the electoral disputes. Delays in the resolution of election disputes are another cause to commit a post-election violence. To resolve the election-related disputes a permanent and consistent method can be arranged like Nepal. In this respect, the law should stipulate that after completion of election, a Special Court of Election (SCE) be formed in each district of the country in order to hear and resolve election related disputes. The courts are constituted accordingly and are expected to complete their disputes within one year. Generally, the 9^th parliamentary election was held with peaceful manner. But there were some specific complaints made on and after Election Day. For example, the President of BNP at Banaripara Upazila, Barisal-2, complained to the Presiding Officer that a BNP Poling Agent was at tacked and threatened by an AL supporter. As of 3 January 2009, the President had not received the response from the Bangladesh Election Commission. In Khulna-2, the AL requested a recount of Ballots. The DC advised he had forwarded the complaints to the central ECB for decision. If it is possible to resolve the electoral disputes locally by establishing SCG that increase the confidence on election process which would be conductive to reduce the post-electoral violence. Maximum post-electoral violence ensued from the contradiction of election result.

 

The impartiality of electoral management in the United States is an essential aspect of maintaining a fair and transparent democratic process. It involves ensuring that election officials and processes are free from partisan bias or undue influence. Here are some key points to consider regarding the impartiality of electoral management in the United States of America:

 

In many states, election officials, such as Secretaries of State or election commissioners, are elected or appointed on a non-partisan basis. This means they are not affiliated with any political party and are expected to carry out their duties without favoring any particular party or candidate (Hasen, R. L., 2012). Many aspects of the electoral process involve bipartisan or multi-partisan oversight. For example, election boards often consist of members from different political parties to ensure checks and balances in decision-making. Federal and state laws and regulations are in place to establish the rules and procedures for elections. These laws are expected to be applied impartially and fairly to all candidates and voters. Individuals and organizations have the right to challenge election-related decisions and outcomes in court. Courts are expected to make rulings based on the law and the Constitution, not partisan considerations. The transparency of the electoral process allows for public scrutiny and media coverage. Any perceived bias or irregularity in the process can lead to public discourse and legal challenges, which can contribute to impartiality. The USA Supreme Court has jurisdiction over cases related to election law and has played a pivotal role in interpreting the Constitution and establishing principles of fairness and impartiality in elections. The USA system of government is designed with a system of checks and balances, where different branches of government and independent entities play a role in safeguarding the integrity of elections. This includes the judicial branch, legislative branch, and executive branch at both the federal and state levels.

 

Despite these mechanisms for ensuring impartiality, concerns have been raised at times about potential biases, gerrymandering, voter suppression, and challenges to access to the ballot. The perception of impartiality can vary, particularly in cases where election officials are elected positions and where political polarization is high. The impartiality of electoral management in the USA is an ongoing subject of public debate, legal challenges, and reform efforts. The balance between partisan interests and the need for impartial election administration is an issue that continues to shape the country's electoral processes.

 

7.3 Integrity

The integrity of EMB is important because its members have the direct responsibility for ensuring this. Integrity of EMB can be easier if it has full autonomy and control over the total electoral process. Through appropriate sanction of electoral laws, rules, and codes of conduct, the integrity of EMB can be established”. In Bangladesh, lack of integrity between the EC and the staff at the EC Secretariat has been reported. For example, “different important decisions and discussions, it has been alleged that the Secretary is called in by the top level of the government.” Lack of integrity is also visible in the different EC organograms. There are three different organograms of the EC, i.e. EC, EC Secretariat and field offices. But the chain of command is absent there. Under this organogram, recruitment in the secretariat and field offices is carried out separately. This practice creates an obstacle to co-ordinate the functions of EC secretariat and field offices. This is a main source of dis-integrity of ECB. Through the Election Commission (Officer and staff) Rules 1979 discrimination in the promotion of officer of secretariat and field-level officers was created. For example, “persons who joined as Assistant Secretaries (AS) in 1984 were promoted to the posts of Joint Secretaries (JS) in 2003. But those who joined as the District Election Officers (DEO) in a field office (equivalent to Assistant Secretaries) during the same year had not received a single promotion.” There was also discrimination between EC field-level offices and EC secretariat. The officers who are recruited at field EC offices; they are not able to transfer from field offices to secretariat. They are only confined at field offices. Recently the EC secretariat and field offices have been merged. The officers who are recruited at field Election Commission’s offices they are able to transfer from field offices to secretariat. Another cause of disintegration in EC’s functions is to hold national election on a single day. In holding election on a single day, the EC has to depend on government for each stage of its functioning. There are no adequate field level polling personnel to conduct a peaceful election on a single day. In conducting a countrywide national election, the TNOs are appointed as AROs. The TNOs are more experienced in conducting election as they have to deal with many aspects of administrative affairs. Their administrative experience is conducive to conduct the election. In reverse, there also arises lack of integrity in the functions of the EC. On the other hand, if Upazilla Election Officers (UEOs) or District Election Officers (DEO) are appointed as AROs and ROs respectively, they cannot work properly because they lack proper experience in conducting election. Therefore, in the national election traditionally the TNO and DC act as ARO and RO respectively in each constituency. The TNO and DC have wide-range influence over their respective areas. Conducting the election is easier for them than UEO or DEO. However, the EC has a plan that next national election would be conducted under the responsibility of EC’s own officers (UEOs or DEOs) (ROs at least in 30-40 Districts). This attempt would decrease disintegration between EC and field level, as they are integrated officers with the EC. Another predominant cause of disintegration in the Election Day management is that those who (Presiding Officers and Polling Officers) are involved in conducting election have no knowledge of election law and rules. Therefore, Election Commission’s decision is not properly implemented, and election is not held in a free and fair manner. 

 

The integrity of electoral management in the United States is a fundamental aspect of the democratic process, ensuring that elections are conducted fairly, transparently, and without undue interference. Here are key considerations regarding the integrity of electoral management in the USA:

 

The integrity of electoral management in the USA is closely linked to the principle of free and fair elections. It involves conducting elections in a manner that allows all eligible citizens to participate without discrimination and ensures that votes are accurately counted and reported. Impartiality is a critical element of integrity. Election officials, whether appointed or elected, are expected to perform their duties without partisan bias, ensuring that all candidates and parties are treated fairly in USA. Transparency is also vital for the integrity of electoral management. The electoral process should be open to public scrutiny, with information on voter registration, voting procedures, campaign financing, and election results made readily available to the public. This transparency in electoral management process of USA helps prevent fraud and irregularities. The strong legal framework also underpins the integrity of electoral management process. Federal and state laws, as well as court decisions, define the rules and procedures for elections, including those related to voter access, campaign finance, redistricting, protecting the voting rights of individuals, including minorities and marginalized groups, is essential to electoral integrity. Laws such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965 aim to prevent racial discrimination in voting (Hale, K., & Brown, M., 2020).

 

The public trust in the integrity of the electoral process is critical. Electoral management bodies, government officials, and non-partisan organizations must work to build and maintain public confidence in the fairness and accuracy of elections. Election officials are accountable for their actions, and mechanisms are in place to address any breaches of integrity. Legal challenges, oversight by independent entities, and electoral monitoring play a role in holding officials accountable. The USA system of government is designed with checks and balances, where different branches of government and independent entities, such as the judiciary and media, play a role in safeguarding the integrity of elections (Burden, B. C., & Stewart III, C., 2014).

 

The USA has made efforts to enhance integrity in the electoral processes. Despite these efforts, concerns about the integrity of elections in the USA have arisen, including allegations of voter suppression, gerrymandering, and foreign interference. Maintaining and enhancing electoral integrity remains an ongoing endeavor in the United States, with efforts to address these concerns through legal reforms, public education, and political discourse.

 

7.4 Transparency and Accountability

“Transparency is the way to accountability. Therefore, the electoral management body should be accountable both before the legislature and the citizenry. The EMB must have assurances that the electoral processes have obeyed the rules. Every electoral administration has a need for openness at all stages of electoral process. Transparency helps the election administration to ensure accountability of election decisions. It means an open process that lays out for public scrutiny the decision of EMB” (Hussain,2011: 23). 

The EMB must be transparent in its functions and management process. Every electoral administration has a need for openness at all stages of electoral process. Transparency helps the election administration to ensure accountability of election decisions. It means an open process that lays out for public scrutiny of the decision of EMB. Accountability of EC in each stage of its process is very important to ensure credible elections. For the sake of credible election, the ECB’s activities and performance should be transparent to the political parties and citizens, as political parties and citizens are major stakeholder of the ECB. But, there is no formal mechanism for bringing the ECB accountable for its performance. The parliament might be the best formal instrument for bringing the ECB to accountability. 

 

To ensure greater degree of general transparency in the electoral process, it is argued that voter registration process is the most important issue. A transparent and non-controversial voter registration process is the basic instrument for ensuring a free and fair election. If the voter registration process is considered as controversial by the candidates and political parties, holding elections with such voter list erodes people’s confidence on the EC. It is observed that the “electoral roll was manipulated during the last two decades which had been in the center of the political turmoil after every election especially since 1991” (Hussain, 2011: 23). Shortly after the CTG took office on January 11, after President Iazuddin Ahmed’s resignation from the post of Chief Advisor of the CTG, they initiated some electoral reform programs. As part of this reform, newly constituted Election Commission headed by Chief Election Commissioner ATM Shamsul Huda under took responsibility to prepare a photo attached digitalized voter list. It increased accountability of Polling and Presiding Officers to identify each voter without being convinced by the Polling Agents of political parties and candidates to avoid fake voting or ballot stuffing in the election.

 

The EC also should be transparent and accountable on its other activities. The EC Secretariat should be accountable to the Commission. But there had been no serious attempt to free the EC Secretariat from the executive before the enactment of Election Commission Secretariat Law 2009. According to the Election Commission Secretariat Law 2009, secretariat was placed under the EC’s own control. There is still ambiguous mechanism to recruit the administrative staff including EC’s Secretary. 25% of the total administrative staff is allocated for the deputed staff. These deputed staff is not accountable to the EC; rather, they are accountable to the government. Therefore, lack of accountability is visible in the electoral process. The major functions of the secretariat are the implementation of the EC policy, preparation of the electoral roll, delimitation of constituencies, conducts all kinds of election, supervision of all polling arrangements throughout the polls. While performing this responsibility these officials who are deputed in the election process feel more attached to the government rather than to the EC. Consistently ambiguities follow in the function of the EC. This is true not only in the case of officials of the secretariat but also others outside the secretariat. This is also true for them who work at the field level during election. Even though they come from different government and semi-government organizations, autonomous bodies and academic institutions, they are not professionally attuned to the principles of the EC as such. So, their commitments remain more to their respective professions rather than to EC. As a result, accountability is seriously affected in conducting election. Their motto is to finish their job somehow. In such a juncture transparency lag and accountability lag become obvious. When an election process suffers from transparency and due accountability, people lose faith on it. When people don’t have faith in the election process EC cannot ensure free and fair election. Even after 40 years of Independence, the Election Commission is unable to attain this reliability.

 

Transparency and accountability are crucial aspects of the electoral process in the USA, ensuring the integrity and fairness of elections. The legal basis for accountability and transparency in the U.S. electoral process is grounded in various federal and state laws, constitutional provisions, and judicial decisions. Article I, Section 4 of U.S. Constitution grants state legislatures the authority to regulate the "Times, Places and Manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives"(Herrnson, P. S., et. al, 2008) but also allows Congress to make or alter such regulations. 14th Amendment of the constitution states that Guarantees equal protection under the law, which has been interpreted to include fair and transparent voting processes. Voting Rights Act of 1965 is aims to eliminate racial discrimination in voting, including provisions for federal oversight of certain jurisdictions with histories of discriminatory practices. National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (Motor Voter Act) requires states to offer voter registration opportunities at motor vehicle departments and other public agencies, and regulates maintenance of voter rolls. Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) establishes standards for voting systems and voter access, provides funds for states to improve election administration, and mandates provisional ballots and identification requirements. Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) and Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) regulate campaign finance, including disclosure of contributions and expenditures, and impose limits on contributions to candidates and political parties. Judicial Decisions over Bush v. Gore (2000) states that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision underscored the importance of uniform standards in the vote-counting process, highlighting the need for transparency and equal protection (Alvarez, R. M., & Grofman, B., 2014). 

SL	Transparency
1	Voter registration processes are typically public in USA, allowing citizens to verify their registration status. States often provide online portals for easy access. States require voters to provide identification at the polls, varying by state, to ensure that only eligible citizens vote.
2	The rules governing ballot access, such as candidate qualifications and petition requirements, are public in USA and subject to legal scrutiny. Secure voting systems and measures, like paper ballots and electronic systems with verifiable paper trails, help maintain the integrity of the vote count.
3	In USA, federal and state laws require candidates, parties, and political action committees (PACs) to disclose contributions and expenditures. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) oversees federal campaign finance laws. There are limits on contributions and expenditures to prevent undue influence, and violations can result in fines and other penalties.
4	Domestic and international observers, as well as party representatives, are often present in USA during elections to monitor procedures and ensure fairness. Poll watchers and observers help identify and report any irregularities or misconduct.
5	The process of counting votes is often open in USA to public observation, and preliminary results are shared promptly. Official results are certified by election boards. Post-election audits and recounts can be conducted to verify results, ensuring accuracy and trust in the outcomes.
6	The legal frameworks governing elections, including procedures for contesting results, are public and established by law. The USA Courts play a crucial role in resolving disputes, ensuring that legal challenges are addressed fairly and promptly.
7	Media coverage and public communication by election officials provide critical information about the electoral process of USA, including key dates, rules, and procedures. The media also serves as a watchdog, reporting on issues such as voter suppression, election security, and campaign finance abuses.
8	Information about the technology used in voting systems, such as software and hardware components, is increasingly made available in USA to the public. Cybersecurity measures are implemented to protect against hacking and other threats, with regular testing and certification of systems.

 

These elements collectively help ensure that the electoral process in the USA is transparent and accountable, fostering public trust in the democratic system. However, there are ongoing debates and challenges, such as concerns about voter suppression, gerrymandering, and the influence of money in politics, which continue to shape discussions on how to improve the system further.

 

7.5 Efficiency

Election procedures are executed wisely and efficiently. A successful electoral management body depends on its efficiency. The legal framework of EMB should clearly define efficient standards for electoral and financial management. The “inefficiency in election organization may be confused with corrupt and fraudulent behavior, leading to more serious challenges to the EMB’s credibility” (Rahaman, 2014:12). Efficiency of electoral management means the superintendence, direction and control over the efficient conduct of election. Efficient conduct of election can be conceived by the preparation of electoral rolls, delimitation of constituencies, Election Day management and post-election violence. The system of electoral process requires a suitable political climate for its successful working. It would be justified to say that there are following conditions which are essential to the successful working of electoral process. For the successful completion of election process, it is essential that the election must be free and fair.

 

Efficiency of an Election Commission is proved through successful completion of election. In doing this job the ECB has not been able to prove to be an efficient institution. There is shortage of human resource in the ECB. This shortage of human resource along with logistics supports hinders the implementation of EC decision. The ECB should make optimum utilization of this resource to carry out its mandated functions in conducting free and fair election. But after 40 years of independence ECB could not establish itself as efficient institution for successful deliberation of election as its mandated functions. It was during the democratic authoritarian regime and military regime that the EC’s credibility and efficiency was damaged and could not be gained for three decades. This trend continued throughout the period of revival of democracy from 1991 up to promulgation of emergency in 2007. The issues discussed below reveal the nature of inefficiency of the EC.

­

It is proved that electoral roll was manipulated during two decades of democratic history which had been in the center of the political turmoil after every election especially since 1991. This has also remained the most critical area that needed to be corrected. After the national election 2001, an NGO stated that the voter list had 13% fake voters in it, and requested the EC to take measures about this irregularity. In the same vein, the preparation of electoral roll of 2006 created serious concern and raised a lot of criticism from different segments of the society including the political parties, civil society, media and general people as well. “It was also identified by the international expert group that the electoral roll so far prepared had 1.2 million fake voters. It was one of the main allegations against ruling BNP made by the opposition. This was one of the causes of virulent political confrontation claiming 17 lives of political activists” (Rahaman, 2014:12).  Such allegations were raised due to the inefficient decisions and activities by the then EC. Some of the decisions and activities included indecisiveness of the CEC about preparing a fresh electoral roll.

 

Another critical area of inefficiency in electoral management process is seen in delimitation of constituency. This is an odd factor of restoring public confidence on electoral process. The ECB should engage with this matter in strategic planning. The ECB quite often takes initiatives in a haphazard manner which runs against the Commission’s objectives of holding free and fair election. The delimitation of the constituency is not only subject to statutory provision of law but Constitutional obligation to create congenial playing field for all candidates participating in the electoral process. It had not been possible after 40 years of independence. Before the general election scheduled in early 2007, the Election Commission has made no move to demarcate the constituencies in line with the latest population survey that took place in 2001. Unexpectedly, after 1/11 when CTG took over power, the ECB got enough time to initiate the completion of delimitation process before the election in 2008. Even, this process was not also free from controversy.

 

Election administration system in Bangladesh suffers from inefficiency in conducting election. This inefficiency was seen in past years. Election Commission has to find huge number of manpower including law enforcing agencies from the civil administration. It is difficult for Election Commission to deploy such large number of people to administer the election. Traditionally, the employee of different government, semi-government, autonomous institutions and educational institutions are appointed as Presiding Officers, Assistant Presiding Officers and Polling Officers at the time of election. As they don’t have due orientational background sometimes they proved to be inefficient in conducting elections. But it is significant to note that free and fair election substantively depends on the competence of the field level polling personnel.

 

Inefficiency is also visible in the management of polling center. Mismanaged and disorderly polling center, as opposed to the rules and norms of the election process, are a common occurrence in Bangladesh. In the polling center, some person or persons, in the previous elections, frequently made the polling authorities surrender the ballot papers or voting machines and threatened the voters to prevent them from going to the polling center to cast their votes. The officers (both polling personnel and security personnel) on election duty are limited and they have no clear idea about the nature of functions to be performed by them. To ensure free and fair election, sufficient number of polling personnel should be provided. The polling booth should be arranged in such a manner as to ensure secrecy of voting. The facility should be provided to the agents of the political parties and candidates to make sure that the system is working well. It will build the confidence among the political parties and candidates, which is very essential to hold the free and fair election. The elimination of mismanagement of polling station is a matter of great challenge for Bangladesh, because, polling center management largely depends on the personal capability and awareness of the polling personnel and of the law enforcement agencies. Moreover, it also depends on communication and infrastructures of polling centers. In last 2008 election, there were nearly 35, 000 polling centers containing multiple booth and each centering for 500-600 voters. Voting took place in male and female polling booths. The transparent ballot boxes were used in this election. There is another lack of efficiency in the electoral process in Bangladesh regarding reducing the post-electoral violence. Post-election violence generally takes the form of revenge. As part of the revenge the post-election of 2001 had been traumatic for religious minorities in some electoral constituencies where they were targeted and victimized. It is widely believed in Bangladesh politics that the Hindu minorities are the vote bank for Awami League. 

 

The efficiency of electoral management in the United States can vary widely depending on several factors, including the state, county, or local jurisdiction responsible for conducting elections. Here are some key points to consider when evaluating the efficiency of electoral management in the USA:

 

SL	Efficiency
1	The U.S. follows a decentralized system of election administration, with each state responsible for conducting its own elections. This decentralization can lead to variations in efficiency from one jurisdiction to another.
2	The efficiency of the voter registration process can vary by state in USA. Some states have implemented automatic voter registration and online registration systems, which can streamline the process and increase efficiency. In contrast, states with more manual processes may experience delays and inaccuracies.
3	The management of polling places can impact the efficiency of elections. Long lines, inadequate staffing, and polling place accessibility issues can lead to inefficiencies on Election Day in USA.
4	The availability and efficiency of early voting and absentee voting options can vary by state in USA. States with extensive early voting periods and no-excuse absentee voting may offer voters greater flexibility and convenience.
5	The use of modern election technology, such as electronic voting machines and voter registration databases, can improve the efficiency of election administration. However, the maintenance and security of these systems are sophisticated in USA to prevent technical issues or security breaches. The efficiency of the vote counting process can also depend on the technology and procedures used. In some cases, efficient counting methods are common in USA that can provide timely and accurate election results, while delays or inaccuracies can erode confidence in the process.
6	The efficiency of the redistricting process, which can impact the fairness of elections, varies from state to state. Some states use independent commissions to draw districts, while others leave the process to elected officials, potentially leading to gerrymandering.
7	Legal challenges, such as disputes over voter access or election procedures, can affect the efficiency of elections. These challenges may result in delays, recount requests, and extended legal processes. This process is very common in USA.

 

Efforts are continually made to enhance the efficiency of electoral management in the USA. However, challenges and issues, such as long lines at polling places, problems with voter registration, and concerns about the security of election technology, persist in some areas. As a result, electoral efficiency remains a subject of ongoing debate and reform at both the state and federal levels. Efforts are made to balance the need for efficiency with the need for transparency, accessibility, and security in the electoral process.

 

7.6 Professionalism

EMB needs to ensure that all election officials, whether core staff or temporary workers, are well trained and acquainted with the necessary skills to apply high professional standards in the implementation of their technical work. The professional members and staff of EMB need most importantly a commitment to the principles of professional electoral management. So, the importance of professionalism considers establishment of a professional electoral management body. 

 

The professionalism of EMB is dependent on the working freedom of the individuals who play part in the election process. A free and fair election substantively depends on the professionalism of the officials and rank and files in election activities. After the inception of Bangladesh, the ECB could not maintain and display professionalism in any election. Whichever government came in power they appointed their stalwart in the ECB and thus tried to control its activities. For example, “the appointment of Justice M. A. Aziz was fraught to be made upon partisan views. Along with him other appointments were also made on partisan grounds, especially the appointment of immediate past Secretary to the Commission S. M. Zakaria as one of the Commissioners, was perceived to have been protégée of then ruling BNP government” (Hussain, 2011: 35). On that account the officials appointed from political party consideration more committed to the party concern than their role as officials of the ECB. This process accelerates further by army rule. The army rulers use elections for their legitimacy. So, election was just an instrument to legitimize power. The same fact explains why ECB has not been endeavoring to give institutional shape. Even after re-emergence of democracy in 1991 the same course continued to pervade. Rather during the democratic rule appointment of officials and rank and files in the ECB has been more vitally influenced by political party. This has been so because of the fact that even after 40 years of the independence no rule has been introduced under constitution with regard to the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Rahaman, 2014: 64). The Election Commission Secretariat was under the executive branch of the government till passing of the Election Commission Secretariat Act 2009. This explains why after achievement of independence an independent Election Commission could not be established. Professionalism cannot be achieved without freedom. There cannot be freedom without commitment to the rule of law. And this commitment can ensure professionalism of the Election Commission’s officials and rank and files. Lack of this commitment has left the ECB away from professionalism (Rahaman, 2014: 65).  On the other hand, a long orientation of election role play can assure institutional professionalism. Democratization process of Bangladesh has been negatively intervened at different times. So, election process could not remain uninterrupted and continuous. This lack of continuum impeded the establishment of professionally fulfilled Election Commission.

 

The professionalism of the electoral management in the United States is a critical aspect of ensuring the fairness, accuracy, and integrity of the electoral process. It encompasses the competence, ethics, and adherence to established standards of election officials and organizations involved in the administration of elections. Here are some key considerations regarding the professionalism of electoral management in the United States of America (USA):

 

Professionalism in the electoral process of USA begins with the recruitment and training of election officials. Many election workers are volunteers, but they received proper training to perform their duties competently, whether it's at polling places or in the administration of elections. Maintaining professionalism in the electoral process of USA election officials did act impartially and without partisan bias. This is particularly important for election administrators, secretaries of state, and election commissions responsible for overseeing elections. Professionalism in electoral management of USA included a strict adherence to federal and state laws, regulations, and court decisions governing the electoral process. Election officials of USA have a strong understanding of these legal frameworks and ensure their consistent application (Alvarez, R. M., Atkeson, L. R., & Hall, T. E., 2013).

 

Professionalism in USA election management involves being transparent in all actions and decisions. Election officials is accountable for their actions and decisions, subject to oversight, and open to public scrutiny. Ethical behavior also is a fundamental aspect of professionalism in the electoral process of USA (Burden, B. C., & Stewart III, C., 2014). This includes avoiding conflicts of interest, conducting elections with integrity, and maintaining public trust. Professional election management requires thorough planning and preparation to ensure that elections run smoothly and efficiently. This includes organizing polling places, managing voter registration, and securing election technology. Managing resources effectively is essential to professionalism. Adequate funding, personnel, and infrastructure are necessary to conduct elections efficiently. Election officials and administrators is committed to do so in the USA electoral management process. 

Voter’s education is the part of the USA electoral process. Informed and confident voters contribute to a smoother and more professional election experience. To enhance professionalism, independent oversight, whether through non-partisan organizations, monitors, or legal checks and balances, can help ensure that election officials adhere to professional standards and uphold the integrity of the process. Election professionals of USA are prepared to handle various challenges, including natural disasters, cybersecurity threats, and public health emergencies. Crisis management is a part of maintaining professionalism. Protecting voter data and ensuring the privacy and security of voter information are considered in USA as a professional responsibility. Proper handling of data is crucial in maintaining public trust in Election (Burden, B. C., & Stewart III, C., 2014). 

 

The professionalism of electoral management in the USA is an ongoing effort. While there are professional and dedicated election officials, challenges can arise, such as accusations of bias, concerns about security, or questions about the efficiency of the process. Maintaining high standards of professionalism in electoral management is essential to safeguard the democratic process and public confidence in elections. Efforts are made at various levels of government to address these challenges and ensure that professionalism remains a cornerstone of electoral administration (Alvarez, R. M., Atkeson, L. R., & Hall, T. E., 2013).

 

7.7 Rule of Law

“The success of an election depends on the extent to which the participants in the political process accept it as a legitimate and binding procedure. If the participants question the outcome of an election, the public also question about it. In order to hold a legitimate election, election commission, the election administration, the stakeholders must respect the laws of the country” (Rahaman, 2014: 13). The major areas of violation of law, rules, orders and regulations are “preparation of voter list”, “measures against electoral malpractices”, “violation of election code of conduct”, submission of information by individual candidates” and “submission of expenditures report by candidates and parties”.

 

It is generally believed that various forms of violation and malpractice had taken place in the elections of Bangladesh in the past. Political parties and their activists involved in an election use conflicts and violence, “malpractice and intimidation to influence the election results in the timing of an election” (Muna, Sara, 2010: 15). Electoral conflicts and violence can also suppress voter turnout, affect voter registration, prevent candidates from running for office, acerbate divisions in society, or even postpone an election. (UNDP, 2011:4). To remove these irregularities the ECB could not prove itself as neutral. In this respect, the 1991 parliamentary election marked a significant departure from this. As we have seen, after the installation of Non-Party CTG it is prime responsibility of CTG to hold free, fair and meaningful elections in Bangladesh. As part of fulfillment of this responsibility, on the eve of election the CTG focuses some specific issues that are re-adjustment of administration to ensure neutrality and the recovery of illegal arms for restoration of law and order situation that would assist the ECB to hold free and fair elections. The CTG is not totally foolproof arrangement to hold free and fair election. The electoral conflicts and violations are still continued. Those who cast their votes for rival candidates have been intimidated and harassed in different natures and ways. Rival party cadres particularly in rural areas, were found to have been engaged in activities such as creating false rumors, threatening revenge if they voted for rival parties (UNDP, 2011:4).

 

The code of conduct rule is most important in the way of holding free and fair election. This rule ensures the congenial behavior of the party and candidates for the sake of free and fair election during the entire election process particularly the conduct of the campaign. To avoid mal practices and manipulation of any kind in the election process, the EC formulated the code of conduct. The EC promulgated the code of conduct in 1996 and it was further amended in 2001 but it did not have separate punishment section. In this backdrop, the ECB formulated another code of conduct Rule 2008 for parliamentary election with separate section on punishment. There also had been violations in some areas during the election campaigning. These violations were isolated in nature; there were few indications of any pattern of intimidation and pressure from candidates and parties. 

 

Effective electoral campaigning can be ensured by obeying electoral code of conduct. The electoral code of conduct seeks to ensure a free and fair election. To ensure, such election, Article 91B was added to the R PO 1972 before the general election held in 1996 authorizing the EC to frame code of conduct for observance by the political parties and their candidates mainly in the course of their election campaign. But painful fact is that the electoral code of conduct is very often obeyed in Bangladesh by its political parties and candidates. Even, candidates hire professional muscle power thereby linking election with criminal activities. There were no effective measures to remove such electoral violence from campaigning process. However, there is a code of conduct, regulating the election campaign. But its fruitfulness depends much on the extent to which healthy norms and practices of campaign have been developed. Healthy norms and practices of campaigning depend on healthy environment of politics of a country. When political process of a country became criminalized then electoral process is not beyond the same. Therefore, there was no election in Bangladesh held without committing violation of electoral campaigning norms and practices. 

 

The principle in relation to the cases mentioned above was laid down in Section 7 of the Representation of People Order (RPO) 1972. According to the Article 75 of the RPO, if any person on his own or indirectly through someone else takes bribe and forces voters to cast their votes or not to cast their votes in favor of his chosen candidates he/she will be liable to punishment. Same way Article 77 says that if any candidate on his own or through someone his/her behalf pressurizes to cast their votes or not to cast their votes for specified candidate is also liable to punishment. These rules were hardly implemented in the previous elections. To avoid these rules were as usual. The EC was unable to take any initiative in this regard. The EC is still unable to take initiatives against such violation. Submission of information by individual candidates is another major area for violating the rules of Election Commission. According to the Section 44AA of the RPO 1972, every contesting candidate has to submit information about the sources of election expenses, assets and liabilities, annual income and expenditure, and copies of his or her income-tax return. The Election Commission hardly followed this rule (Akram, et.al, 2008:95). The RPO of Bangladesh requires both parties and candidates to submit accounts of their electoral expenses to the BEC through the Returning Officer (RO) after the election. The expenditure reports of the candidates and the political parties are rarely submitted to the RO in stipulated time. According to Article 44C of the RPO, the political parties have to submit expense statements within ninety days of the completion of election in all constituencies. 

 

The rule of law is a fundamental principle that guides the electoral management process in the United States. It ensures that elections are conducted in accordance with established laws and legal frameworks, and that all participants in the electoral process, including election officials, candidates, and voters, are subject to the same legal standards. The electoral process is governed by a complex web of federal and state laws, regulations, and court decisions. These laws establish the rules and procedures for elections, including voter registration, ballot access, campaign finance, and redistricting. The rule of law must be followed and enforced consistently in USA. The rule of law demands impartiality in electoral management of USA. Election officials, whether appointed or elected, must carry out their duties without partisan bias. The impartial application of the law is treated in USA.

 

The principle of equal protection under the law, as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, requires that all voters be treated equally. This means that no eligible voter should be denied the right to vote or have their vote counted differently based on their race, ethnicity, gender, or other protected characteristics. In certain circumstances, the federal government provides oversight of elections to ensure that the rule of law is upheld. The Voting Rights Act of 1965, for example, empowers the federal government to monitor and intervene in cases where voting rights may be violated.

 

The rule of law applies to the redistricting process. States must follow the legal criteria and principles set forth in both federal and state law when redrawing electoral district boundaries. Gerrymandering, or manipulating district boundaries for partisan advantage, is subject to legal challenges if it violates the rule of law. The judiciary of USA play a crucial role in enforcing the rule of law in electoral management. When legal challenges arise, courts are responsible for interpreting the law and making determinations that uphold the legal framework and the rights of voters and candidates (Alvarez, R. M., Atkeson, L. R., & Hall, T. E., 2013).

 

In USA, rule of law prohibits discrimination in electoral management, requiring equal treatment for all eligible voters. Laws and regulations must be applied in a manner that does not discriminate against any particular group. The rule of law is a foundational principle that underpins the integrity, fairness, and legitimacy of elections in the United States. Upholding the rule of law is essential to ensure that the electoral management process is conducted in a manner consistent with democratic principles, legal standards, and the protection of citizens' voting rights. Legal challenges, judicial oversight, and a commitment to impartiality are key elements in maintaining the rule of law in the electoral management of USA.

 

8. Electoral Management in Bangladesh and the USA:  A Critical Area

Electoral management in Bangladesh and the USA differs significantly due to their distinct political systems and administrative structures. Here are some key differences in electoral management in these two countries:

 

9. Electoral Management in Bangladesh and the USA:  Lessons learned

A comparative analysis of electoral management in Bangladesh and the USA can provide valuable insights and lessons for Bangladesh's electoral system. These two countries have different political systems and administrative structures, there are several key lessons that Bangladesh can learn from the USA:

 

Area	Lessons for Bangladesh	Implementations
Independence	Bangladesh can benefit from further enhancing the independence and impartiality of its Election Commission. Reducing political interference in the election management process is crucial to ensure fair elections.	Strengthen the legal framework to protect the independence of the Election Commission, appoint impartial commissioners, and establish mechanisms for transparency and accountability
Transparency	Transparency in electoral management is essential for public trust. Bangladesh can improve the accessibility of election-related information and create mechanisms for public scrutiny of the electoral process.	Enhance public access to voter registration, election results, and campaign finance information. Allow non-partisan monitoring and domestic observation.
Professionalism	Invest in professional development and training for election officials to ensure that they have the knowledge and skills required for efficient and unbiased election management.	Establish comprehensive training programs for election officials and poll workers, covering legal requirements, technology, crisis management, and ethical conduct.
Non-Discrimination and Voter Rights	Protecting the voting rights of all citizens is fundamental to a democratic process. Bangladesh should ensure that no eligible voter is discriminated against.	Strengthen anti-discrimination laws, ensure equal access to the ballot, and take measures to address barriers that certain groups may face.
Crisis Preparedness	Be prepared to handle unforeseen challenges, such as natural disasters or public health emergencies, which can affect elections. Robust crisis management plans are essential.	Develop and implement crisis preparedness and contingency plans for elections to ensure their continuity in emergencies.
Election Technology and Security	Invest in secure and efficient election technology, and safeguard against cybersecurity threats to maintain the integrity of the electoral process.	Ensure the security of voter registration systems, voting machines, and election data. Regularly update technology to keep pace with evolving threats.
Legal Framework and Oversight	A clear legal framework, independent oversight, and robust mechanisms for accountability are essential. Bangladesh should ensure that its legal framework is comprehensive and responsive to evolving challenges.	Review and update election laws and regulations, and establish an independent oversight body to monitor elections and address violations of electoral law.
Voter Education	Voter education plays a pivotal role in ensuring informed and confident voters. Bangladesh should invest in voter education initiatives to increase civic participation.	Develop voter education programs to inform citizens about their rights, the electoral process, and the importance of voting.
Public Trust and Accountability	Building and maintaining public trust in the electoral process is crucial. Ensuring accountability and transparency can help achieve this goal.	Promote public awareness, involve civil society organizations in election oversight, and establish mechanisms for addressing public concerns and complaints.
Checks and Balances	A system of checks and balances, involving multiple branches of government and independent entities, is vital for safeguarding the integrity of elections.	Reinforce the role of the judiciary, legislative oversight, and independent organizations in election management and oversight.

 

9. Conclusion

In comparison with the USA, where free and fair elections have been held at regular intervals by the principles of the constitution since the very beginning of that country's independence, the effective operation of electoral management could bring about changes to the current political landscape of Bangladesh. This study can be a potential source to uncover electoral activities in terms of politics, democracy, voting, and participation. This study generally emphasized comparisons to diagnose limitations, and to bring possible changes to increase the effectiveness of the electoral management process. What are 'the essentials to establishing the electoral management process as a credible system? The study revealed some of the issues which include independence, impartiality, integrity, transparency, accountability, efficiency, professionalism, and rule of law. Based on these guiding principles, this research also uncovered some issues, such as the composition of the electoral management process, laws and procedures, preparation of electoral roles, delimitation of constituencies, political parties’ registration process, a delegation of functions, and institutional setup of the electoral management process

10. References

Akram, Shazada & Das, Shadan Kumer. (2008). “Bangladesh Election Commission: A Diagnostic Study”. Bangladesh: TIB.

Akther, Muhammad Yeahia. (2001). Electoral Corruption in Bangladesh. London: Ashgate Aldershot.

Ali, Raisa. (1996). Representative Democracy and Concept of Free and Fair Elections. New Delhi: Deep and Deep Publications.

Ali, Rehana. (2001). The Working of Election Commission of India. New Delhi: Jnanada Prokashan (P&D).

Alvarez, R. M., & Grofman, B. (Eds.). (2014). Election administration in the United States: The state of reform after Bush v. Gore. Cambridge University Press.

Alvarez, R. M., Atkeson, L. R., & Hall, T. E. (2013). Evaluating elections: A handbook of methods and standards. Cambridge University Press.

Beetham, David (2005), Democracy, a Beginner’s Guide, Democracy: A Beginner's Guide (Beginner's Guides), Paperback, Kindle Edition, One World Oxford.

Burden, B. C., & Stewart III, C. (Eds.). (2014). The measure of American elections. Cambridge University Press.

Edgeworth, Linda & Finn, Daniel. (2000). “Pre-Election Technical Assessment: Republic of Bangladesh”. Washington: International Foundation for Election Systems.

Gordon, Leonard A. (1980). Central themes for a unit on South Asia. Columbia University: South Asia Institute.

Hale, K., & Brown, M. (2020). Administering elections: How American election officials manage today’s ballot box. Palgrave Macmillan.

Hasan, Manzoor (2010), “How assertive has the Election Commission been?” published in the Daily Star on Thursday, February 25.

Hasanuzzaman, Al Masud. (2009). “Political Party and Governance in Bangladesh”. In Mushrafi, Mokhdum-E-Mulk and Rahaman, Hasibur (Eds.). Bangladesh: Politics and Governance. Dhaka: Mowla Brothers.

Hasen, R. L. (2012). The voting wars: From Florida 2000 to the next election meltdown. Yale University Press.

Herrnson, P. S., Niemi, R. G., Hanmer, M. J., Francia, P. L., & Bederson, B. B. (2008). Voting technology: The not-so-simple act of casting a ballot. Brookings Institution Press.

Hossain, Kamal (2006), “Electoral Reform and Caretaker Government”, paper presented in a Seminar, Islamabad, 17 May.

Hussain, Brigadier General M. Sakhawat (2011), Review of Electoral Reform, Bangladesh 1972 - 2008 (submitted to the National Defense College: Unpublished M. Phil Thesis).

Hussain, Naseem Akhter. (2008). “Elections in Bangladesh: The Question of Independence of the Election Commission”. Bangladesh: Asian Studies. No. 27.

Karim, Waresul. (2004). Election under a Caretaker Government. Bangladesh: The University Press Limited.

M. Harrop and W.L. Miller. (1998). Election and Voters: A Comparative Introduction. London: McMillan.

Mannan, Md. Abdul. (2005). Election and Democracy in Bangladesh. Bangladesh: The Academic Press and Publishes Library.

Mendis, Dushayantha (ed.). (2008). Electoral Process and Governance in South Asia. India: SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.

Muna, Ndulo and Sara, Lulo (2010) “Free and Fair Elections, Violence and conflict”, Harvard International Law Journal, Volume 51, Page No. 157.

Muniruzzaman, Talukder. (1971). The Politics of Development: The Case of Pakistan (1947-1958). Dacca: Green Book House Limited.

Rahaman, Hasibur, Khatun, Sherina & Bilkis, Azmira. (2013). “Electoral Management in Bangladesh and India: A Comparative Study”. University of Dhaka: Journal of Sociology. Volume 5. Issue 2. P. 91-111).

Rahaman, Hasibur. (2014). Electoral Management in Bangladesh. Dhaka: A H Development Publishing House.

Rahman, Md. Saidur. (2001). Law on Election in Bangladesh. Bangladesh: published by Mrs. Mahfuza Rahman.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Asia-Pacific Regional Centre (2011), “Understanding Electoral Violence in Asia”.

 

[Gopalganj Science and Technology University provided funding for this research for the fiscal year 2023–2024, which was authorized by UGC. Regarding the study's design and execution, the supporting and assigning authority played no role]