1. The Question that Keeps Circulating:

Amid the upcoming national election, questions arise—whether the Election Commission is truly neutral and trustworthy. Allegations of being BNP-leaning, unnecessary complications over NCP’s registration and the ‘Shapla’ symbol, as well as the Islamic parties’ demand for a Proportional Representation (PR) system—all these have intensified controversies surrounding the Commission’s activities. Yet the undeniable truth is—within the Constitution and existing laws, the Commission possesses sufficient authority and flexibility. Thus the question arises: when the law itself provides opportunities, why does the Commission hesitate? And in such a state, how acceptable will an election under their authority be?

2. Scope of Law and Constitution:

The Constitution of Bangladesh ensures a democratic process for national elections.

PR System: The Constitution and existing election laws empower the Commission to propose and initiate proportional representation. It is not prohibited; rather, it is a matter of policy and procedural alignment.

Symbol Allocation: According to the Election Commission’s rules on symbol allocation, there exists no effective legal barrier to approving a new symbol. NCP’s demand for the ‘Shapla’ symbol too falls well within the Commission’s jurisdiction for resolution.

Therefore, in both cases, the Commission has clear constitutional and legal pathways open.

3. The Commission’s Stance and the Crisis of Trust:

On one hand, Commission officials claim PR is impossible without amending the law, while on the other hand, they show ‘legal difficulties’ regarding the allocation of symbols. But analysts and experts unanimously argue—this interpretation is partial, and reflects reluctance in discharging responsibilities. As a result:

(1) The crisis of political trust deepens.

(2) The neutrality of the Commission is being questioned in media and public perception.

(3) Interest in participation in the upcoming election is negatively affected.

4. The Question of Appropriateness:

A national election is not merely an ‘event’—it is a process of gaining public confidence. When the Commission hesitates to utilize opportunities already provided in the Constitution and law, then—

Small and large parties alike lose the chance for equal competition.

Unnecessary disputes over voting systems and symbols divide public opinion.

Even the international community raises doubts about the election’s credibility.

Thus, even if elections are conducted under the Commission, the risk of their moral legitimacy being eroded is very high.

5. The Future of Democracy in a Crisis of Trust:

Bangladesh’s democratic journey has already passed through many ups and downs. If the Election Commission continues to hesitate despite having authority, the consequences will not remain confined to a single election. In the long run, it will put the political culture and the very future of democracy into question. If people lose faith that justice will be served despite existing laws, their trust in the electoral system will be permanently undermined. And once that trust is broken, rebuilding it becomes exceedingly difficult.

6. Conclusion:

The Constitution and existing laws of Bangladesh provide the Election Commission with sufficient authority—they may, if they wish, initiate discussions on Proportional Representation, or allocate a new symbol to the NCP. In reality, there is no insurmountable obstacle. But the Commission’s hesitation and unwillingness are only deepening the crisis of political trust. Therefore, the pressing question now stands: when the law itself shows the way, is the Commission’s hesitation not pushing the election into a crisis of mistrust?