The Dark Art of Rigging Elections: Lessons from Bangladesh

speaker1

Welcome to our podcast, where we delve into the dark art of rigging elections. I'm your host, and today we're joined by a brilliant co-host who will help us explore the intricate mechanisms that undermine democracy. We’re going to focus on the 2018 Bangladeshi parliamentary election, a prime example of how hybrid regimes manipulate the electoral process. So, let's dive right in!

speaker2

Hi, I'm really excited to be here! So, what exactly is a hybrid regime, and how does it differ from a fully authoritarian or democratic system?

speaker1

Great question! A hybrid regime is a political system that combines elements of both democracy and authoritarianism. On the surface, it may appear democratic with elections, a constitution, and some civil liberties. However, beneath the facade, the ruling party often uses various tactics to manipulate the electoral process and consolidate power. The 2018 Bangladeshi election is a perfect case study of this phenomenon.

speaker2

That's fascinating. Let's start with the first strategy you mentioned: creating a climate of fear. How did the government achieve this in Bangladesh?

speaker1

Absolutely. The government of Bangladesh used a combination of tactics to instill fear. One of the most notorious was an anti-narcotics campaign that was heavily politicized. In 2018 alone, there were 437 extrajudicial killings and 34 disappearances. This campaign was used to target opposition members and their supporters, making it clear that dissent could be deadly. This created a pervasive atmosphere of fear, which effectively silenced many potential critics and opposition voices.

speaker2

Wow, that's really chilling. How did this impact the actual election process? Were there any specific incidents you can share?

speaker1

Certainly. The climate of fear had a significant impact on the election. For instance, many opposition candidates and their supporters were intimidated into staying home or withdrawing from the race. In some cases, opposition polling agents were physically expelled from voting centers on election day, making it nearly impossible for them to monitor the process. This not only suppressed voter turnout but also made it easier for the ruling party to manipulate the results.

speaker2

That's really concerning. Moving on to the next strategy: neutering opposition candidates. Can you explain how this works and give some examples?

speaker1

Sure. Neutering opposition candidates involves using legal and administrative means to weaken their ability to compete. In Bangladesh, this was done through politically motivated charges. According to SHUJAN’s analysis, 61% of opposition candidates had ongoing legal cases, compared to only 7% of ruling party candidates. This created a significant imbalance, as many opposition candidates were either in jail or had to focus on their legal battles rather than campaigning. This effectively neutralized their ability to challenge the ruling party.

speaker2

That's a powerful tactic. How about disqualifying opposition candidates? What kind of dubious circumstances were used to disqualify them?

speaker1

Disqualification is another crucial strategy. The Election Commission in Bangladesh often showed clear bias towards the ruling party. They would disqualify opposition candidates under a variety of dubious pretexts, such as technicalities or alleged violations of election rules. One example is the disqualification of an opposition candidate for not correctly filling out a form, which is a minor issue that could easily be resolved but was used to eliminate a strong contender. This systematic disqualification further skewed the playing field in favor of the ruling party.

speaker2

It's astounding how these tactics are so systematically applied. What about controlling the media? How did the government manage to control the flow of information?

speaker1

Controlling the media is essential for any regime looking to manipulate elections. In Bangladesh, the government enacted the Digital Security Act of 2018, which curtailed freedom of expression and made it easier to prosecute journalists and critics. They also used selective accreditation for journalists and slowed down the internet to hinder transparent reporting. This ensured that only government-approved narratives were disseminated, making it difficult for the opposition to gain traction or expose any irregularities.

speaker2

That sounds like a multi-layered approach to control information. How did this affect the international community's perception of the election?

speaker1

The international community was indeed concerned, but their ability to influence the process was limited. The government restricted election observers by delaying visas and limiting their access. This resulted in fewer credible assessments of the election process, which made it easier for the ruling party to claim legitimacy. Without robust international oversight, the government could more easily get away with electoral malpractices.

speaker2

That's really concerning. What about ballot stuffing on election day? How did this play out?

speaker1

Ballot stuffing is one of the most blatant forms of electoral fraud. On election day in Bangladesh, there were numerous reports of pre-stamped ballots being introduced into the counting process. Opposition polling agents were often expelled from voting centers, making it difficult to detect and report these irregularities. In some cases, the results were announced without proper verification, further undermining the integrity of the election.

speaker2

It's a complex web of tactics. How do these strategies compare to other hybrid regimes, like Zimbabwe or Turkey?

speaker1

You bring up a great point. While the specific tactics may vary, the overall strategy is quite similar. In Zimbabwe, for example, the government has used a combination of violence, legal harassment, and media control to suppress the opposition. In Turkey, the government has shut down opposition media outlets and imprisoned journalists. The key difference is often the degree of subtlety and the specific mechanisms used, but the goal is the same: to maintain power while maintaining a facade of democracy.

speaker2

It's fascinating to see these patterns emerge. What about the long-term impacts on civil society and political institutions in Bangladesh?

speaker1

The long-term impacts are significant. The 2018 election marked a further consolidation of power by the ruling Awami League, which has led to a gradual erosion of civil liberties and democratic institutions. Civil society has become more cautious, and opposition groups have been weakened. This has created a political environment where dissent is increasingly risky, and the space for genuine democratic participation is shrinking. The broader implication is that Bangladesh is transitioning from an electoral democracy to a hegemonic authoritarian regime.

speaker2

That's a troubling trend. How do voters and opposition groups resist these manipulative tactics?

speaker1

Resistance is challenging but not impossible. In some cases, grassroots movements and civil society organizations have been able to raise awareness and mobilize support. For example, in Venezuela, despite severe repression, opposition groups have continued to organize protests and use social media to expose electoral fraud. Similarly, in Bangladesh, there have been efforts to document and report election irregularities, though these efforts face significant risks. The key is sustained activism and international support to keep the pressure on the government.

speaker2

It's inspiring to see that resistance is possible. To wrap up, what are the key takeaways from this case study, and what can we learn from it for future elections?

speaker1

The key takeaway is that electoral manipulation in hybrid regimes is a sophisticated and multi-faceted process. It involves a combination of creating a climate of fear, neutering and disqualifying opposition candidates, controlling the media, restricting election observers, and ballot stuffing. These tactics are not isolated but part of a systematic effort to undermine democracy. For future elections, it's crucial to have robust international oversight, independent media, and strong civil society organizations to ensure fair and transparent processes. By learning from the lessons of Bangladesh, we can better protect the integrity of elections and the democratic values they represent.

speaker2

Thank you so much for this insightful discussion. It's been a fascinating journey through the dark art of rigging elections. Stay tuned for more deep dives into political science and the mechanisms that shape our world. Until next time!