Election Candidates’ Affidavits: Real objective remains unfulfilled

The candidates for both the national and local government elections submitted their affidavits to the Election Commission (EC) many times in a non-transparent and incomplete manner, often hiding important information such as dual citizenship and loan defaulting, but the commission apparently does not scrutinise these affidavits thoroughly or take legal steps without complaints, rendering the rule apparently of little use.

The EC mainly takes the matter seriously when rival candidates, banks, or aggrieved persons oppose the questioned contender’s candidacy, raising a serious question about the oversight and capacity of the EC. 

Article 12 Section 3(B) of the Representation of the People Order, 1972, states that all candidates in the national parliamentary election must submit eight types of information, including criminal cases, sources of income and loans by the candidate or by dependents with their nomination paper.

However, currently there is no effective mechanism to verify the truthfulness of candidate disclosures. Unless challenged by rivals on the campaign trail, these discrepancies largely go unnoticed.

Recently, Manjurul Ahsan Munshi, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) candidate in the Cumilla-4 constituency, filed his affidavit while hiding loan default information, but the EC was silent over it. Without raising any objections, the District Returning Officer validated his nomination.

Later, this led Hasnat Abdullah, the NCP-nominated candidate for the same constituency, to raise questions regarding the transparency of the scrutiny process. Furthermore, many are describing the Returning Officer’s perceived bias as a “victory for Manjur” even before the election is held.

According to the affidavit available on the Election Commission’s website, there are four columns regarding debt: whether there are any loans in his own name, joint names with others, names of dependents, or in the name of his institutions. In every column, he has stated, “None.”

However, inquiries at various banks and financial institutions revealed that Manjur’s company, MAM Power Limited, has outstanding loans at Premier Bank, Prime Finance and Investment Limited, and IDLC Finance Limited. These loans are listed as “wilful defaults” in the Credit Information Bureau (CIB) report of the Bangladesh Bank.

The candidacy of the heavyweight politician was later declared cancelled.

Similarly, Jamaat-e-Islami’s Kurigram-4 candidate, Mustafizur Rahman Mostak, has been accused by Dr Md Ali of hiding key information in his electoral affidavit for the 13th national parliamentary election.

According to the complaint, Jamaat candidate Mostak failed to disclose information regarding an active and operational commercial licence in his submitted affidavit. The licence in question – a Seed and Fertilizer Dealer Licence (No 827) – was issued to him by the Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation (BADC). The complaint states that despite the licence being valid and active, it was concealed from Mostak’s statement of income and assets.

Moreover, while the value of movable property or land is declared, disclosing the purchase date remains optional. This lack of transparency makes it impossible to verify if the reported price aligns with the market rate at the time of acquisition.

Providing affidavits by candidates was made mandatory starting from the 2008 Ninth National Parliamentary Election. In the affidavits for this election, it has been made compulsory to provide ten types of information, including the candidate’s age, educational qualifications, profession, criminal records, income, and assets.

An analysis of the affidavits reveals that eight candidates either provided vague information or did not provide any at all.

Regarding the issue, Dr Iftekharuzzaman said that there is hardly any notable example of the EC verifying the completeness, concealment and legality of income- and asset-related affidavit data. However, in case of non-disclosure of any such data and inconsistency of disclosed and/or undisclosed income and wealth information with legitimate sources, nominations can be cancelled at any time after the election.

“It’s not, however, the job of the EC alone. The ACC should check and take action in case of illegal possession of income and wealth, while the NBR should check if there are instances of tax evasion. These three institutions should work within their respective jurisdictions and in collaboration with each other, which can help progress towards cleansing the dark side of politics and public representation,” he said.

Jasmine Tuli, former additional secretary of the Election Commission Secretariat, said, “The law explicitly states that accurate information must be provided in the affidavit. Otherwise, the entire purpose will be defeated. The Election Commission (EC) is supposed to verify all information and announce it by the deadline for the cancellation of candidacy.”

“In reality, the EC cannot oversee everything alone. Agencies like the NBR, Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), and the Finance Division are involved; candidates’ information is supposed to be verified through them. Honestly, this is not just an issue with this specific Election Commission; it is a systemic weakness. This has happened before as well,” she added.