The Political Landscape of Bangladesh: Democratic Erosion and Contested Transitions Ahead of the 2026 Elections

Presented by Minhaz Samad Chowdhury

Independent Human Rights Defender

---

Abstract

As Bangladesh approaches its 2026 general election, it stands at a critical juncture marked by institutional fragility, unresolved grievances, and competing visions of national transformation. This article examines the dynamics of democratic erosion and contested political transitions in Bangladesh through an analytical framework grounded in theories of electoral authoritarianism, contentious politics, and regime stability. Drawing on historical trajectories of electoral protest, the analysis demonstrates how cycles of boycotts, repression, and manipulated elections have shaped the political environment over the past fifteen years. The article concludes by outlining future scenarios and highlighting the normative aspiration of a New Bangladesh—a democratic, humane, participatory polity in which no political party is excluded, no citizen is silenced, and the rule of law prevails above personal or partisan interests.

---

1. Historical Trajectory of Electoral Contestation and Protest

1.1 Elections as Contested Arenas: The Legacy of 1990

Bangladesh’s contemporary political trajectory has been profoundly shaped by the collapse of military rule in 1990. The movement that toppled the Ershad regime not only re-established electoral democracy but also embedded two structural legacies:

1. Elections as the primary site of democratic legitimacy,

2. Street protest as the ultimate corrective mechanism when elite consensus collapses.

This duality aligns with the scholarship of Charles Tilly and Sidney Tarrow, who describe contentious politics as the intersection where political claim-making meets state resistance. Bangladesh’s electoral history exemplifies this dynamic: when institutional trust erodes, political grievances spill onto the streets.

1.2 The Abolition of the Caretaker System and the Erosion of Electoral Trust

The adoption of the non-party caretaker system in 1996 created a “neutral referee,” reducing fears of incumbent manipulation. However, its abolition through the Fifteenth Amendment in 2011 eliminated a stabilising institution and re-politicised electoral administration. The opposition—particularly the BNP—interpreted this shift as a move toward indefinite incumbency, catalysing recurrent cycles of boycotts, hartals, blockades, and violent confrontations.

1.3 Protest as a Response to Electoral Illegitimacy

Major political conflagrations—2014, 2018, and 2024—were not spontaneous outbursts but predictable consequences of deepening mistrust. Each flawed election became a focal point for public grievance, reproducing a cycle of procedural elections without substantive legitimacy. By 2024, this cycle culminated in a mass uprising that fundamentally destabilised the governing order.

2. Factors Influencing Governance Shifts and Opposition Exclusion

2.1 The Architecture of Exclusion Under Sheikh Hasina

Research on competitive authoritarianism (Levitsky & Way) provides a useful framework for understanding Bangladesh’s political environment from 2009–2024. During this period, the ruling Awami League employed a multifaceted strategy to marginalize the BNP and other oppositional actors:

• Legal repression via the Digital Security Act (DSA), ICT Act, and fabricated criminal cases;

• Coercive repression including enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and mass arrests;

• Institutional capture of the Election Commission, judiciary, and police;

• Administrative obstruction of opposition rallies, meetings, and party offices.

These methods systematically eroded the BNP’s organizational capacity, reducing its ability to contest elections or articulate alternative political visions.

2.2 Continuities Under the Post-2024 Unitary Government

Following the collapse of Sheikh Hasina’s government in August 2024, the interim administration pledged democratic restoration. Yet certain policies echo prior authoritarian tendencies:

• Use of anti-terror laws to detain individuals affiliated with the former ruling party;

• Suspension of political activities for key parties, particularly the Awami League;

• Concentration of political authority in unelected technocratic bodies.

Although the targets have shifted, the logic of exclusion remains intact. Such continuity raises concerns that structural authoritarianism may outlive the regime that originally cultivated it.

3. Critique of Disputed Electoral Cycles: 2014 and 2024

3.1 The 2014 Election: The Institutionalisation of Non-Competition

The 2014 general election stands as a pivotal moment in Bangladesh’s democratic decline. The BNP’s boycott left 153 out of 300 seats uncontested, transforming the election into a mere procedural exercise. Widespread violence, low turnout, and targeted attacks against minorities further undermined legitimacy. International observers described the election as “deeply flawed,” and scholarly assessments classify it as an example of hegemonic electoral authoritarianism.

3.2 The 2024 Election: The Apex of Controlled Democracy

Held amid mass arrests, repression, and opposition exclusion, the 2024 election produced a pre-determined outcome. The distinction between ruling-party candidates and “independent” proxies blurred, while low voter turnout signalled a profound crisis of public confidence.

The 2024 polls represented the culmination of a decade-long pattern: elections not used to transfer power but to legitimise its concentration.

4. Irregularities of the 2018 Election

The 2018 election, often cited as the most systematically manipulated in Bangladesh’s history, featured multiple mechanisms of fraud:

• Pre-stuffed ballot boxes were delivered to polling centers before voting began;

• Exclusion of opposition polling agents through violence or intimidation;

• Inflated turnout figures are inconsistent with observed participation;

• Booth capturing by ruling party activists;

• Media restrictions are preventing credible reporting.

Transparency International Bangladesh documented irregularities in 47 out of 50 surveyed constituencies, demonstrating the breadth of the malpractice. The election entrenched the Awami League’s supermajority and normalised state-engineered electoral outcomes.

5. Socio-Political Impact of the 2024 Mobilisations

5.1 A Generational Reawakening

The student-led uprising of 2024—initially sparked by quota reform—evolved into a mass movement against authoritarianism, corruption, and impunity. Unlike earlier partisan mobilizations, the 2024 movement featured:

• Horizontal leadership structures,

• Digital mobilisation networks,

• Broad-based societal participation cutting across class, gender, and region.

The protests produced a new political consciousness and catalyzed the demand for structural democratic reforms.

5.2 The Rise of Civil Society as a Political Counterweight

Years of repression had weakened civil society, but the 2024 movement revitalised it as a legitimate political actor. Human-rights groups, professional bodies, and youth organisations reclaimed space in national discourse, helping to redefine political accountability and advocate for institutional reform.

6. Scenarios for a “New Bangladesh” Under Suppressed Political Rights

6.1 Scenario A: Managed Pluralism

If the upcoming election excludes major parties or restricts political freedoms, Bangladesh may drift toward managed pluralism, where minor or newly formed parties compete within boundaries set by the state. This scenario risks producing:

• Low voter engagement,

• Chronic legitimacy deficits,

• Recurrent protest cycles.

6.2 Scenario B: Tutelary Democracy

A more restrictive trajectory involves tutelary oversight by security institutions or technocratic bodies. Elections may be held, but meaningful competition would be curtailed. This hybrid system—neither authoritarian nor democratic—would stabilise power temporarily but obstruct long-term democratic consolidation.

6.3 Scenario C: Participatory Democratic Reconstruction

A more hopeful scenario envisions:

• Reinstatement of full political rights,

• Electoral competition is open to all non-violent parties,

• Institutional reform of the judiciary, security forces, and Election Commission.

This aligns with the aspirational ideal of a New Bangladesh—a polity grounded in democracy, humanity, pluralism, and the rule of law.

7. Policy Continuity and the Structural Causes of Protest

Although regimes change, structural practices often persist. Key continuities between the pre-2024 and post-2024 governments include:

• Overreliance on extraordinary laws to manage political dissent;

• Centralisation of authority in executive or semi-executive actors;

• Lack of transparent mechanisms for checks and balances.

Such continuities reproduce the very conditions that have historically triggered protest movements. Unless governance shifts from control-oriented to rights-oriented, the cycle of repression and resistance may continue indefinitely.

8. The Paradox of Elections Under Political Suppression

The core contradiction confronting Bangladesh ahead of the 2026 elections is this:

How can elections be meaningful when major political forces are structurally excluded?

Whether the suppression targets the BNP under Hasina or the Awami League under the interim authority, the fundamental problem remains identical:
Democracy cannot function when political competition is criminalised.

This paradox undermines the moral and political foundation of elections, contradicting the public’s fifteen-year demand for a free, fair, multiparty system.

---

Conclusion: Toward a Democratic, Humane, and Inclusive Bangladesh

Bangladesh stands before a transformative opportunity. The 2026 elections could become:

• A turning point toward genuine democratic renewal, or

• Another episode in a long series of controlled transitions.

Achieving the aspirational vision of a New Bangladesh—a state where no party is suppressed, no citizen is silenced, and no election is predetermined—requires structural reform, political inclusion, and unwavering commitment to justice and humanity.

This moment demands courage from all actors—political parties, civil society, and the international community—to ensure that Bangladesh’s next chapter is written not by coercion or exclusion, but by the people themselves.

---