The decision by the National Citizen Party (NCP) to form an electoral partnership with Jamaat-e-Islami has sparked internal discord and disheartenment among its supporters and members who once had high expectations. While a significant faction of the party has backed the move, several key individuals have expressed their disappointment and frustration publicly, leading to resignations and critical statements on social media. The NCP, which emerged from the July 2024 uprising vowing to break away from traditional politics, now faces a critical moment of evaluation due to this alliance.
The resignations of prominent figures Tasnim Jara and Tajnuva Jabeen have been particularly noteworthy, signaling a setback for the NCP’s image as an inclusive and democratic force dedicated to combatting discrimination. More resignations are anticipated following their lead. Originating from a student-driven movement that played a role in ousting an authoritarian regime, the NCP had garnered moral authority based on principles of sacrifice, bravery, and a commitment to reform political norms. The recent alliance, spearheaded by convener Nahid Islam and senior leaders, has prompted concerns about whether the party has compromised its ideological stance for political gains.
Nahid Islam has attempted to downplay these concerns by asserting that the collaboration with Jamaat is purely for electoral purposes and not ideological. He insists that the NCP’s core objectives of reform, justice, and anti-hegemony remain unchanged. Islam has highlighted the security threats faced by NCP members and activists, particularly after the tragic killing of Sharif Osman Hadi, suggesting that partnering with Jamaat could offer protection to grassroots workers. However, despite the challenging nature of electoral politics in Bangladesh and the security risks confronting new parties, the question lingers whether these factors justify alienating key supporters and members.
Furthermore, the party’s explanation fails to address the underlying apprehensions. The argument that the alliance is essential to safeguard the reform agenda and secure a “yes” vote in the referendum falls short, as no election contestant has outright rejected the July Charter or advocated for a “no” vote. The NCP had positioned itself as a moral alternative to the prevalent culture of convenience and compromise, but its sudden shift from nationwide participation to limiting nominations to around 30 seats has reinforced the perception of decisions being made without transparency or consultation. Jabeen has alleged that the arrangement was premeditated and marginalized aspiring candidates, particularly women leaders who have faced online harassment and threats from right-wing factions.
The NCP’s recent actions have raised doubts about what truly sets it apart from the political culture it once condemned. With numerous central committee members openly opposing the alliance and influential figures like Mahfuj Alam expressing disillusionment, the party’s future as a credible agent of change appears uncertain. Instead of prioritizing electoral gains at the expense of credibility, the NCP could have opted for patience, even accepting defeat if necessary, while upholding its ideological integrity. Such restraint, rather than a convenience-driven alliance, could have underscored its commitment to genuine transformation.