Gone are the days when you needed to consult only a few social leaders to win an election. In 1919 the population of India was 250 million but only 5 million voted for election of members of the Provincial Legislative Councils, 1 million for the Imperial Legislative Council and 1700 for Council of State. More people voted in 1937 but universal adult franchise was a long way off. At that time 40 million voters representing a little over 10 percent of the population of British India elected 1585 representatives. In 2001 we have 75 million voters electing 300 members in Bangladesh parliament. An electoral constituency in Bangladesh today in average has 250,000 voters. We have single member constituencies and simple majority principle for winning elections. So a candidate is required to somehow reach this vast mass of voters. Contesting in an election now, therefore, demands heavy campaigning by all candidates. The usual means that are followed in a campaign are postering, leafleting, miking, meetings and direct contact with voters by the candidate or his supporters. Gone are the days when Shamsul Haque won as an opposition candidate in Tangail against a mighty zamindar backed by the strength of the political party in power. Shamsul Haq raised a war chest of only Rs. 1300/- Today, to be sure, there is substantial expenditure involved both at the level of the national party as well as at the level of the candidate. According to our election rules a candidate is expected to manage his campaign with not more than Tk. 500,000; but it is generally believed that this represents only a small percentage of actual expenses. The extent of spending is increasingly becoming an important determinant of success in elections. In olden days newspaper coverage of campaigns and information about candidates helped individual election campaigns and parties and candidates soon learnt to issue advertisements in the newspapers. Today the electronic media because of its wide and easy reach of voters, is preferred much more to put across campaign messages as well as to carry out negative propaganda. In olden days friends and relations did most of the campaigning for a candidate. Today there is complete party paraphernalia with hosts of workers for a campaign.

Money is used not simply to popularize the message of the candidate but also to smear and run down the opponent. Money is required for legitimate activities like running election offices, buying lists of voters, printing and distributing posters, manifestos, pamphlets or leaflets, holding meetings, making public contact or using microphones. Money these days is used to bribe voters with gifts or buy them directly. Money is essential for assembling goons known as mastans to conquer polling stations and intimidate voters supporting the rival. Money is also used to bribe election officers - from Returning Officers to Ansar guards of polling centres.

Traditionally campaigns have been financed by candidates with help from family and friends. We know of candidates who covered almost all of their voters on foot and boat at minimal cost but heavy physical exertion. But it is a different game now; handshaking is too time-consuming and personally visiting all areas of a constituency is well-nigh impossible. Campaigning today costs money and it is mostly financed by donations from business. In US it is claimed that election spending has a tradition of two hundred years and in recent times it has become rather corrupt and campaign finance reforms is a hot issue these days. It has been confirmed that in the US elections held in 1996, 92 percent of Senators and 88 percent of Congressmen won who had more money to spend then their rivals. In the 2000 elections a Senator is reported to have spent nearly $ 55 million. There is a system of federal financing of Presidential campaign and it is subject to some requirements on disclosure and limits to contributions by both amounts and purposes. But a candidate may opt not to take advantage of federal financing and then he or she is free of all restrictions on his/her election expenditure. Incidentally President George Bush did not seek federal financing and raised one of the biggest war chests for the 2000 election. The most harmful financing is done by lobbyist groups like National Rifle Association or Right to Life groups. They spend unlimited amounts for candidates who endorse their points of view and use offensive advertisements against candidates who oppose their views. There is also campaign spending of enormous amounts by various professional associations, such as AFL-CIO or Medical Association, or pressure groups in the name of advocating specific issues. These expenditures are called soft money and it is the real target of campaign finance reforms. Campaign financing is increasing all over the world and the problem of buying influence over peoples' representatives is a real one in many countries, both developed and developing.

The use of muscle power is also not new in elections. The most famous use of muscle power is what brought Hitler's Nazi party to power in Germany in 1933. Over a period of six years Hitler's storm-troopers ably supported by what came to be known later as Goeblian propaganda (euphemistic term for downright lies) completely annihilated opposition from the country and settled a madman as the Fuhrer of Germany. Muscle power remained a force to reckon with in local elections in USA until recently. Muscle power inevitably accompanies money power because maintenance of goons depends on funds and usually leads to systematic extortion. For example, industrial plants, transport services, shopping areas are required to pay donations so that they can operate without being unduly harassed or halted. The use of muscle power in Bangladesh territory in the early days of democracy was restricted to specific constituencies where powerful leaders maintained goons and behaved like warlords in their areas.

The overwhelming power of money and muscle made its appearance with the advent of military rule in the country. Military or quasi-military rule is inevitably arbitrary and that is where the fault lies. Military governments invariably depended on the two-pronged strategy of coercion and bribery to secure legitimacy. Spreading money was extensively used for degenerating politics. "Money is no problem" became a catchy slogan in so poor a country. Political culture began to be debased by intrusion of intelligence agencies and fracturing of parties that military rulers initiated. Repeated application of this strategy by succeeding military governments ensured a pivotal place to money and muscle in the politics of Bangladesh. Muscle power is required to intimidate the opposition and hijack its dedicated workers and leaders and thus make a show of popular support to gain legitimacy. Once the tricks are learnt they are used indiscriminately to retain political power. Historically students have been politically very active in the subcontinent. Since the days of the revolutionary teacher Henry Derozio (1809-31) and 'Young Bengal', students have been spearheading political movements in the subcontinent. Military rule infiltrated student politics and set up armed support groups among students. Usually the muscle power of the youth would break up opposition rallies or disturb their public meetings or even private political gatherings. The tradition of disturbing peaceful demonstration with mastans armed with hockey sticks is a legacy of the governorship of Monem Khan in the Pakistani period. These days, however, we have access to powerful fire-arms for this basically evil and anti-democratic practice. A special and almost unique use of muscle power in Bangladesh is experienced in the conquest by students' wings of political parties of centres of higher learning in the country. Violence in campuses of educational institutions is a matter of national shame and this violence is usually perpetrated by outside mastans masquerading as student or youth leaders. The most important use of muscle power is on the day of the election. Mastans storm polling centres and occupy it for either a limited period of time or for long with a view to rigging elections. Muscle power in politics these days, however, is essentially a problem in the developing countries.

Gresham's law does not only operate in money matters, it seems to have a much wider sway. Bad practices seem to have driven out clean traditions of political behaviour. Political parties in Bangladesh now have students' wings, labour wings, ladies wings, and youth wings and so on and so forth. Even professional associations are aligned to political parties; for example, medical practitioners have separate associations aligned to major political parties. Most parties have their storm-troopers to extend party influence and enforce party discipline. Within parties powerful leaders have their own strong-arm supporters to maintain their individual position in the party. Students and youth wings as also labour wings by and large play the role of enforcers. It is a kind of vicious circle. Even if you have no need of mastans you cannot do without them because your rival controls an army of these goons. I am told that if you do not have goons at your back and call, you simply cannot operate in the political field. At election time you experience the power and importance of your mastani strength. You may not even hold a peaceful demonstration or a campaign meeting if your muscle power is not sufficient. A political worker decides to work for you and he proves to be a dedicated worker with a good following. Your opponent may initially try to win him over to his side, if necessary with some financial incentives. If that fails it is not unusual to use physical violence to prevent him from working for you. There were cases of violence leading to death or serious injury reportedly to sway workers from one side to another. I am aware of two cases of death and two of serious injury related to campaign 2001. A political worker who changes allegiance at election time becomes a special target for violence.

Muscle power is crucial in determining the outcome of voting. Muscle power can drive away your campaign workers from the field. There are stories where active workers were threatened out of their constituency and could return home only after the election. Thanks to the stupid instructions of the Election Commission, the names and particulars of many polling agents became widely known and some of them were hijacked by the opposing camp the night before the election. I personally can bear testimony to the fact that muscle power prevented members of the minority community from exercising the right of franchise. But to top it all muscle power occupied selected polling centres for limited periods of time and stuffed the ballot boxes. Long before the law enforcing agents could respond to cry for help the damage was done.

Corruption is endemic in Bangladesh and greed seems to be limitless. Public service in this social environment has become a victim of deal-making. In politics the power of money has assumed an unprecedented level of importance. First of all, money is required to build and maintain the muscle power. Extortion, hijacking, occupation of centres of power and influence are freely indulged in by political leaders. Election is the means to power and hence election is a big game of money. Organizing a campaign itself is an expensive proposition even if money is not doled out to recruit mastans or to buy voters or their leaders. In the election in a neighbouring constituency a moneyed candidate openly announced his price for a vote - cash gift, clothes, food items etc. Then he went on to occupy a few polling centres expelling all the voters and supporters of his rivals from these centres. He just manufactured a verdict as he wanted it to be. With money you also put up dummy candidates. Each candidate gets a polling agent per booth. If you have half a dozen dummies you can swamp the polling centre with your agents. One agent opposing six others stands no chance of gaining even the most legitimate point.

People in general believe that in politics black money is unavoidable. Politicians depend on donations to run their political offices, undertake their programmes, reach their message to people and recruit workers and followers. Politicking depends on donations that are never made public and this is at the root of monetary corruption in politics. You fight an election with secret donations; surely you owe some obligations to the donors. The impractical and unreasonable regulations on campaign expenditure make about every politician a liar. Once you adopt a corrupt practice of small magnitude, the jump into high level of corruption then is an easy next step. Donations are used as much for party work as for personal expenditure. There is no system of budgeting or accounting for political parties.

This is, indeed, a dismal picture. Elections, nay politics, are held a hostage to the power of money and muscle. What can be the way out? Muscle power in Bangladesh is not only threatening law and order but it is also impeding economic development. Although it flourished under military and quasi-military rule, there has been very little improvement since the restoration of democracy in 1991. But provided there is the earnest desire to arrest the decline, it is possible to control mastanism. The two major political parties must agree to eliminate patronage of mastans. The mastans are generally well-known and they have very good terms with law enforcing agencies. They thrive under the patronage of political leaders. A case of murder in which a mastan is involved may not be acknowledged by the police or even the complaint to that effect may not be acted upon by the police. A telephone call from a powerful leader can set free a criminal of the highest order. Most terrorists act under the patronage of the party in power. They change allegiance very rapidly with change of government. The main mastans are associated with students, labour and youth organizations although they get their orders from important political leaders. They love their vocations despite insecurity because of power and money they get out of their work.

Violence and terrorism can be effectively tackled by inspiring leadership. First of all, all political parties must publicly severe association with armed gangs and shun violence in political activities. Second, they must disband all the front and associated organizations such as students' organizations, youth groups or labour fronts. There will be students' organizations but they would function on their own, not under the guidance of a political party. They would elect their own leadership and would not be dictated by any political high command. They would prepare their manifesto and draw up their agenda of work themselves. In their ideology and style of operation they may be aligned to a party but would not be tied to it for all time. They would have freedom of action and thought not conforming to a party platform. This is not a tall order and, in fact, this was the reality some fifty years ago. Third, rehabilitation of mastans must be seriously undertaken by all parties. This is not an easy job because it requires character transformation on the one hand and on the other provision of useful substitute vocations. Many of the services the mastans render on a discriminatory basis may be universalized and made subjects of professional services. Without a drastic reform of law enforcing agencies that work hand in hand with mastans, it would be impossible to wean mastans away from their vocation. It is a different issue but in passing it may be commented that the police force and the intelligence agencies have degenerated so much that perhaps we need to create new law enforcing agencies with new blood altogether. Finally, since charity begins at home in order to make the campaign against terrorism and violence credible and enforceable it must begin with reining in the mastans of the party in power. I have emphasized rehabilitation of mastans but it does not mean that the recalcitrant should be leniently treated. Mastans who cannot be cured must be severely dealt with. Only a crusade will work nothing less than that should be considered. Then only we can think of a society without mastans. It does not mean that there will be no criminals - dacoits and thieves and murderers. But then they will be criminals to be dealt with by the normal process of law and the art of patronization of criminals in the name of politics will disappear.

Corruption is much more complex a problem and its containment is all that we should contemplate. We should have a fresh look at the thirteenth constitutional amendment and strengthen the neutrality and accountability of the unique institution that we have created. The electoral system that bestows the authority of a demigod to the Deputy Commissioner, the Returning Officer, must be completely overhauled. There are many reforms in the electoral laws and practices that are discussed often without serious action. They need to be looked at seriously. How come we could not institute a system of voter identity card in almost a decade? We should seriously think about proportional system of representation and staggered voting over a number of days.

But before I conclude let me share with you an idea I have been articulating for over a decade about financing of not only election campaign but political parties as well. A major political party, defined by receipt of at least 5 percent popular votes in a general election, would receive a grant from the national budget for its activities. Each party will receive a basic grant and then additional allocations will be related to proportion of votes obtained in the election. This fund is for maintenance of offices, remuneration of workers, recruitment drives, party propaganda, training of workers and leaders and election campaigns. The parties will be obliged to prepare and execute regular annual budgets with work programmes. They will collect donations publicly but there will be limits placed on individual contributions and such contributions will attract tax deductions. Periodic accounts statements will be published and duly audited. Reforms must begin with reforming the parties and parties should jointly develop a code of conduct for themselves committing themselves to democratic practices, tolerance and consideration for others, discarding of violence and prohibition of unaccounted money.