Imagine a football match where only the team jerseys are changed, while the players, coach, tactics, and referee all remain exactly the same. Would the outcome of the match be any different? Probably not. Elections are much the same. Will removing party symbols from ballot papers change the nature of local politics? Or will political loyalties, the influence of money, and existing power structures continue to shape the outcome? The Election Commission’s (EC) recent proposals for reforming Bangladesh’s local government election rules have brought these questions back into public debate.
Since gaining independence, the people of Bangladesh have repeatedly struggled and campaigned for free and impartial elections. Yet, more often than not, disappointment has outweighed expectations. Following the parliamentary election held in February 2026, the elected political party is now governing the country. Against this new political backdrop, questions of institutional and state reform have become central to national discourse.
The EC has announced its plan to begin the next cycle of local government elections with Union Parishad polls between September and October 2026. It has also proposed several amendments to the local government election rules with the stated objective of fostering a new electoral culture. Under the proposed reforms, political party symbols will no longer appear on ballot papers. The EC has also proposed banning campaign posters, discontinuing the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), increasing the amount of election deposits, and raising the ceiling on campaign expenditures. On paper, these reforms appear significant. The real question, however, is whether they are confined merely to electoral procedures or whether they reflect a genuine political commitment to bringing about meaningful structural reforms in local governance.
A closer look at the proposals shows that elections without party symbols are not entirely new in Bangladesh. Before the 2016 local government elections, amendments to the law introduced party-based elections across all tiers of local government, from Union Parishads to City Corporations. As a consequence, local governance gradually shifted its focus away from community development, public service delivery, and addressing local issues. Instead, political allegiance and party affiliation became increasingly dominant. Local elections, in effect, evolved into an extension of national politics. The current EC deserves recognition for attempting to reverse this trend. However, changing ballot papers is far easier than transforming political culture on the ground. The influence of political parties, money, and local muscle power cannot disappear overnight. Therefore, it would be unrealistic to assume that a symbol-free election automatically guarantees an election free from political influence.
The experiences of neighbouring countries reinforce this reality. India’s Panchayati Raj system is widely regarded as one of Asia’s most successful models of decentralisation. In Kerala, local governments have played an exemplary role in development planning and budget implementation. Yet, in states such as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, local elections continue to be heavily influenced by caste politics, dominant interest groups, and coercive local power structures. This demonstrates an important lesson: legal reforms alone cannot produce the desired outcomes unless they are accompanied by broader political and social transformation. Similar experiences can be observed elsewhere in Asia. In Indonesia, despite extensive decentralisation, many local elections continue to be shaped by money politics and political dynasties. Likewise, in the Philippines, although democratic electoral processes are firmly established, influential political families continue to dominate local centers of power.
Conversely, several countries have achieved greater success by granting genuine authority to local governments. South Korea and Japan are notable examples. Their local governments enjoy substantial autonomy, enabling them to raise local revenues, formulate development plans, and make many policy decisions independently, without constant intervention from the central government. These international experiences suggest that the success of local government depends not only on credible elections but, more importantly, on whether elected representatives possess genuine authority to govern.
Public discussions often focus on elections themselves, but far less attention is given to what happens after the votes are counted. How much real authority do elected representatives actually possess? This is perhaps the greatest weakness of Bangladesh’s local government system. Although the people elect Union Parishad Chairpersons, Mayors, and District Council representatives, they remain heavily dependent on central government allocations to implement development programmes. Their capacity to generate local revenue is limited, their planning authority is constrained, and their administrative powers remain restricted. Ultimately, the issue is not merely about electoral symbols- it is about power.
As the upcoming local government elections approach, an important question has emerged in public discourse. If a political party unofficially supports a candidate and everyone in the locality is aware of it, can the election genuinely be described as non-partisan? Even without party symbols, political affiliations, partisan loyalties, financial influence, and local power relations are likely to continue shaping electoral outcomes. For this reason, non-partisan elections should not be viewed merely as an administrative arrangement but rather assessed within the broader context of political realities.
If elections are to become truly meaningful, local governments must be financially strengthened. Elected representatives should be given greater authority to formulate their own budgets and generate local revenues. The Election Commission’s decision to increase election deposits and campaign spending limits must also be accompanied by stronger financial transparency. Candidates’ assets, income, and campaign expenditure should be made easily accessible to the public. At the same time, citizen oversight should be institutionalised. The active participation of civil society organisations and local media must be ensured throughout the entire electoral process, not merely on polling day.
Over the past fifteen years, the people of Bangladesh have accumulated considerable experience with politics and elections. Consequently, they are unlikely to be reassured simply by new regulations or procedural reforms. Particularly in the aftermath of recent political changes, citizens want to see whether those elected through their votes are genuinely able to deliver. While removing party symbols is undoubtedly an important reform, the ultimate success of local democracy will depend on whether elected representatives possess real authority, remain accountable to the people, and genuinely reflect the voices and priorities of their local communities.
Experiences from democratic countries around the world demonstrate that democracy cannot be judged solely by what happens on Election Day. Its real test begins the day after the election, through the quality of governance that follows. As Bangladesh prepares for the upcoming local government elections, a fundamental question confronts the nation: Are we seeking merely to reform the electoral process, or are we genuinely committed to transforming local governance itself? Will the forthcoming local government elections mark the beginning of a new chapter in Bangladesh’s local democracy, or will they become yet another story of unrealised potential? The answer to that question will determine the true significance of these reforms.
Ultimately, the issue is not about symbols, rules or elections, but about power, implementation, and the system of governance that follows them. An election may mark the beginning of democracy, but its success is measured through every decision, every act of accountability, and every development initiative undertaken thereafter. The upcoming local government elections are therefore more than just another electoral event- they represent a defining test for Bangladesh’s democracy. Will we simply change the appearance of the ballot, or will we truly transform the character of local governance? The answer will determine whether this moment is remembered as the beginning of a new democratic chapter or merely another missed opportunity.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author
The writer is an academic and researcher in local government. E-mail: [email protected]
