‘Yes’ Wins Referendum Amid Major Counting Irregularities

In the recently held Thirteenth National Parliamentary elections, the accompanying nationwide referendum drew significant attention, not only for its overall outcome but also for alarming discrepancies in the reported vote counts. According to preliminary data released by the Election Commission (EC), the total number of registered voters across the country stood at 127,720,334. Voter turnout in the referendum was reported at 60.26 per cent, with 48,074,429 casting ‘Yes’ votes and 22,565,627 voting ‘No’. Additionally, 7,020,285 ballots were deemed invalid or void.

Despite the national-level ‘Yes’ majority, several constituencies exhibited glaring numerical inconsistencies. The most striking case was Rajshahi-4, where voter turnout was reported as an implausible 244.295 per cent. With a registered voter base of 319,909, the number of votes cast was shown as 781,523, including 612,219 ‘No’ votes and 145,382 ‘Yes’ votes. In this constituency, Abdul Bari Sardar of Jamaat-e-Islami was elected to Parliament.

Conversely, Sirajganj-1 recorded an unusually low referendum turnout of 7.899 per cent, despite a parliamentary election turnout of 60.83 per cent. In Netrokona constituencies 3, 4, and 5, the number of ‘Yes’ votes reportedly exceeded the total number of registered voters.

The referendum also highlighted strong regional variations. In the three hill districts of Khagrachhari, Rangamati, and Bandarban, as well as in three constituencies of Gopalganj, the ‘No’ vote prevailed. In Gopalganj, the ‘No’ vote was nearly three times higher than the ‘Yes’ vote.

The following table summarises key constituency-level results (all figures converted to numerals for clarity):

At the national level, the ‘Yes’ vote accounted for 62.47 per cent, while ‘No’ garnered 29.32 per cent. Although some corrections were made to the Rajshahi-4 and Sirajganj-1 results overnight, discrepancies in Netrokona constituencies remain unresolved.

These inconsistencies and stark regional differences have sparked widespread criticism regarding the credibility of the referendum. Political analysts and civic observers are closely monitoring the situation, calling for a thorough review and greater transparency in the vote-counting process.

In conclusion, while ‘Yes’ officially prevailed nationwide, severe counting anomalies and localized irregularities have cast doubt on the referendum’s overall integrity, raising urgent questions about the electoral system’s reliability.