Election Matters
Editors’
Note:
The
petitioner, who planned on running for office in the Union Parishad, submitted
his nomination for the chairmanship before the pertaining Upazilla Returning
Officer with all the required documents, including a declaration asserting that
his candidacy was valid in accordance with the provisions enshrined in sections
26(1) and 26 (2) of the স্থানীয় সরকার (ইউনিয়ন পরিষদ) আইন, 2009. After scrutinizing the petitioner's nomination
paper, the concerned Upazilla Returning Officer annulled his candidacy solely
on the premise that his name was enlisted in the list of the Bangladesh Bank's
CIB (Credit Information Bureau) as a guarantor of a loan amount that had been
defaulted upon. The petitioner being aggrieved by such a decision brought an
appeal before the appropriate appellate authority in conformity with Rule 15 of
the “স্থানীয় সরকার (ইউনিয়ন পরিষদ) বিধিমালা, 2010. The aforesaid authority dismissed the appeal upon hearing it on
the same grounds, upholding the findings of the Upazilla Returning Officer. The
petitioner then preferred this application to challenge that appellate
decision. After hearing from both sides, the court held that “a guarantor to a
defaulted loan amount is not disqualified to contest the respective election”.
The court further observed that unlike Paurashava election, Upazilla Parishad,
City Corporation, and Parliamentary elections, an aspiring candidate is not
required to disclose the necessary information by providing ‘qmge¡j¡’ in a
prescribed form along with a declaration (O¡oZ¡) when submitting a nomination
paper (as per section 26(3) of the Ain, 2009 read with Rule 12 of the Rules,
2010). Hence, the only condition the candidate must meet to contest in the
election of the Union Parishad is to make a declaration (O¡oZ¡) that he is
competent to serve as Chairman under the applicable laws. Giving ‘qmge¡j¡’ in a
prescribed manner is not thus mandated by law for this election.
Guarantor
to a defaulted loan is not a disqualification:
It is
now a settled principle of law that a guarantor to a defaulted loan amount is
not disqualified to contest respective election. (Para 13)
Affidavit
and declaration in the local government elections:
It is,
however, the mandate of law that while submitting nomination paper for
contesting Paurashava election, Upazilla Parishad election, City Corporation
election and Parliamentary election the candidate is required to submit
affidavit ‘qmge¡j¡’in a prescribed from along with the nomination paper
containing detail information on his/her educational qualification, his/her
implication in any criminal case, if there be any, occupation, source of income,
description of property owned by him/her, including family members and loan
liability, if there be any, with declaration that all information of the
respective documents so provided are correct and true to the best of his
knowledge. Conversely, in Union Parishad election the candidate is relieved
from making such disclosure. The only requirement is that vide Rule 12 of the
ÒØq¡e£u plL¡l (CE¢eue f¢loc) ¢eh¡ÑQe ¢h¢dj¡m¡, 2010Ó (as amended in 2016) the
candidate is to give certificate “fËaÉ¡uefœ” although vide Section 26(3) of the
Ain, 2009 the candidate is required to submit an affidavit ‘qmge¡j¡’ along with
the nomination paper declaring that he is not disqualified vide Section 26(2)
to contest the respective election. (Para-15, 16)
In Union
Parishad election the respective candidate is not required to disclose those
7(seven) vital information, which are essential for the respective voters to
know in order to assess, evaluate and ultimately to select their candidates who
is going to represent them as the head of the respective rural administrative
and local government unit for a prescribed period. Although, in Paurashava
election, Upazilla Parishad election, City Corporation election and
Parliamentary election those informations are required to be provided by the
respective candidate while submitting nomination paper by giving ‘qmge¡j¡’ in a
prescribed from along with declaration (O¡oZ¡). (Para-19) [Mohammed Faruk ul
Azam Vs. The Election Commission (Farah Mahbub, J) 17 SCOB [2023] HCD 1]
Challenged the result of the
election filing an application under Article 49 of the Representation of
the People order, 1972
The Representation of the People Ordinance, 2001 (Amendment) সংশোধনের ফলে নির্বাচন সংক্রান্ত অভিযোগ শুনানীর নিমিত্ত হাইকোর্ট বিভাগকে ক্ষমতা অর্পন করা হইয়াছে। Saber Hossain Chowdhury Secretariat Bangladesh Election Commission, Commission (Amirul Kabir Chowdhury J) (Civil) Election 3 ADC 692
Election petition being Election
Tribunal Case
Recounting of the ballot papers and to
declare him as a member in place of declared candidate stating, inter alia,
that election was held for the post of Chairman and Members on 04.03.2003.
After the counting of the ballot papers at the election center no objection was
raised by the Respondent regarding error in counting ballot papers and on such
application was filed either before the Presiding Officer or the Returning
Officer or any higher authority. He further submits that a case of recounting
is to be established from the stage of counting of ballot papers but in the
instant case no such case has been made out and the case of recounting was for
the first time made out before the Tribunal and as such the Tribunal was not
justified in recounting the ballot papers as no objection was raised for the
same before the Presiding Officer of the Center. As a result, the High Court
Division committed illegality in passing the impugned judgment and order on
misconception of law and mate- rials on record. Md. Badshah Alam Md. Shahidul
Islam & others (M.M. Ruhul Amin J)(Civil) 3ADC 958