Bangladesh presidential poll to see first 'ballot battle' in over 35 years
Dhaka, Aug 10
With Bangladesh set to hold its presidential election on August 20, the country's highest constitutional office is set to witness a "ballot battle" for the first time in more than three and a half decades.
The election marks a significant break from the long-standing practice of presidents being elected unopposed, a trend that has continued since 1991, local media reported.
According to the Bangladesh Election Commission's schedule, the presidential election will be held in the session chamber of the National Parliament Building on August 20, where members of Parliament will vote by secret ballot if more than one candidate remains in the race.
Following the resignation of Bangladesh President Mohammed Shahabuddin on July 24, Speaker of the National Parliament Hafiz Uddin Ahmed is currently serving as the country's acting president. Under the Constitution of Bangladesh, the election of a new President must be held within 90 days of the office falling vacant, Bangladeshi daily Dhaka Tribune reported.
Reports suggest that both the ruling Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Jamaat-e-Islami-led 11-party alliance, the main opposition force in parliament, have decided to field their candidates for the presidential election.
Citing multiple party sources, Bangladesh's newspaper The Daily Star reported that BNP Secretary General and Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives Minister (LGRD) Minister Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir is likely to be the party's nominee for the presidency. Fakhrul has also signed the consent form for the presidential nomination, while the party reportedly may formally announce his candidacy on Wednesday or Thursday.
Although the presidential election will be contested, the ruling BNP enters the race with a clear numerical advantage. In the 2026 parliamentary election, the BNP won 210 seats, compared with 77 secured by the 11-party alliance led by Jamaat-e-Islami, giving the ruling party a clear majority in parliament.
Speaking to Dhaka Tribune, Senior Supreme Court Appellate Division lawyer Advocate Manzil Morshed said: "The opposition knows that it will lose the election. Even then, fielding a candidate is a political strategy."
Asked why the Jamaat-led alliance entered the presidential race despite knowing its candidate is likely to lose, Manzil Morshed said: "There is a discussion in the political arena that Jamaat and BNP are closely connected. They may have fielded a candidate merely as a showpiece so that no one can accuse them of not participating or raise questions about the matter."
Additionally, Badiul Alam Majumdar, an election expert and founder of Dhaka-based civil society platform Shujan, said: "The presidential election is predetermined. Whoever the ruling party wants will become president."
— IANS
Reader Comments
The article says the ruling party has 210 seats vs 77 for opposition—clearly a foregone conclusion. But sometimes symbolism matters in politics. The opposition putting up a candidate shows they're not afraid to challenge, even if the odds are stacked. Reminds me of our own electoral dynamics in India.
As someone watching from abroad, it's fascinating how political symbolism works. The lawyer's comment about fielding a candidate "as a showpiece" is quite telling. Democracy isn't just about winning—it's about participation and keeping the system honest.
Honestly, this feels like political theater. The election expert basically admitted the result is predetermined. Why waste taxpayer money on a charade when everyone knows who's going to win? A symbolic gesture doesn't make it meaningful democracy.
The fact that this is news shows how far Bangladesh's democracy has to go. In India, we've had contested presidential elections for decades—even if the ruling party's candidate usually wins due to electoral college math. Competition, even symbolic, keeps institutions alive. This is a small but positive step. 🇧🇩
"Ballot battle" is a strong phrase for something where the ruling party has a 3:1 majority. But you have to give credit to the opposition for at least trying. For 35 years, presidents were elected unopposed—that's not democracy, that's a rubber stamp. This change, however small, matters.
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.