How many more times will we be deceived

Less than three months remain before the general election. Chief Adviser Dr Muhammad Yunus has repeatedly stated that this will be an exceptionally good election, unlike any the country has seen before. The Chief Election Commissioner has also pledged to ensure a free and fair vote. Yet, optimism is tempered by widespread concern.

The Election Commission has been holding continuous consultations with various political parties. Most smaller parties have expressed apprehension over a genuinely free election. They question the level playing field and the circulation of illicit funds. Some parties fear ballot fraud and ballot box snatching. Complaints have also been raised about larger parties violating the election code of conduct, even before the election schedule is announced.

The discussion on illicit money refers essentially to corrupt funds. In a society rife with corruption, it is unrealistic to expect that money will not influence votes. Even the strongest election commission cannot completely curb widespread corruption. While measures such as enforcing the election code of conduct, limiting posters, billboards, microphone usage, and banning plastic or polythene materials can reduce illicit spending, their impact is limited. When corrupt money is spent freely in the electoral process, it inevitably undermines society’s moral fabric.

Democracy is premised on reflecting the will of the people through elections. However, in practice, the majority’s will often depends on the choices of a minority. Minors cannot vote, and adult family members are assumed to represent them. Internationally, the voting age is usually 18, though some countries allow 16-17-year-olds. In Bangladesh, the law is consistent with global standards.

But what happens if a portion of adult citizens, driven by poverty, ignorance, or greed, sell their votes? A voter who exchanges their vote for money cannot hold any elected representative accountable, nor will they have the moral courage to demand accountability. Corrupt money strikes at the core of human ethics, and democracy loses its vital strength.

Can the election code prevent the influence of illicit money? Only if all parties and candidates genuinely refrain from unethical tactics could some mitigation be possible—but such consensus is unlikely. Expecting a corruption-free society while ignoring systemic bribery is as unrealistic as seeking a mythical golden path. Despite aspirations for a “New Bangladesh” after 5 August last year, corruption persists.

Reports indicate that top political leaders, student advisers, and even vocal figures face allegations of embezzlement, sometimes involving billions of taka. Much of this illicit wealth may well be spent in the upcoming election. After the fall of a fascist government, the interim administration emphasised reforms and state repair, even delaying the national election. Yet, corruption continues unchecked, undermining state reforms.

Officials who accept bribes in exchange for favourable postings perpetuate a corrupt cycle. In a system where the law’s reach is often limited, corruption erodes the foundations of democracy and public moral authority. Distrust of bureaucracy is common in many Southern Hemisphere nations, but governance cannot function without civil servants. They implement policies and deliver citizen services. When corruption taints the bureaucracy, the consequences are profound.

Over the interim government’s fifteen-month rule, much has been accomplished, but holding a widely accepted general election remains the most pressing priority. The elected government is expected to enforce July’s reforms and adopt zero-tolerance measures against corruption. This requires uncompromising law enforcement and the promotion of moral resistance. Ethical education must be prioritised in schools and families, while citizens’ livelihoods must be protected through fair employment and market policies.

Reducing extortion and tax burdens and ensuring fair business practices will further support anti-corruption efforts. Only a practical, evidence-based action plan can uproot corruption, and such a strategy should be the first step in repairing the state.