Seat bargains, silent revolts inside 11-party bloc

Abu Jakir :

As the country moves closer to the 13th parliamentary elections in February, the seat-sharing negotiations among the 11-party alliance led by Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami are increasingly revealing not just tactical disputes, but deeper questions about how durable this post-uprising political experiment really is.

Formed in the aftermath of the 2024 mass uprising, the alliance began as a platform largely uniting Islamist parties. Jamaat-e-Islami, Islami Andolon Bangladesh, Khilafat Majlish, Bangladesh Khilafat Majlish, Khilafat Andolon and Nezame Islam Party announced their joint journey in May last year.

With the later inclusion of JAGPA and the Bangladesh Development Party, it emerged as an eight-party bloc regularly visible in simultaneous street programmes. The entry of the youth-led National Citizen Party (NCP) and two others expanded it into an 11-party coalition, but also shifted its centre of gravity from ideological unity to electoral arithmetic.

That shift is now testing the alliance.
Although central leaders of several parties say “some decisions” have been reached, no comprehensive, final seat-sharing formula has yet been announced. All parties have already submitted nomination papers, a move that has effectively transferred the burden of compromise from meeting rooms to the field, where dissatisfaction among aspirants and activists is becoming more visible.

Party insiders confirm that repeated meetings have failed to produce a swift settlement. The delay itself has become a source of tension. Field-level leaders complain that uncertainty is hampering early campaigning, weakening coordination and encouraging parallel preparations as if a unified electoral map may never fully materialise.

The most sensitive fault line runs through Islami Andolon Bangladesh, one of the alliance’s older partners. Media reports have said the party is unhappy at not securing what it considers a minimum acceptable number of seats.

According to party sources, activists are particularly displeased with the idea of contesting in only around 35 constituencies. In practice, Islami Andolon has submitted nomination papers in 272 seats, a move widely interpreted by observers as leverage-building — either to strengthen its hand in negotiations or to keep the option of a broader independent contest alive.

Publicly, however, the party’s central leadership is careful to soften that perception. Islami Andolon Bangladesh spokesperson and senior joint secretary general Gazi Ataur Rahman said the party has made no numerical demand.

“We are not asking for a specific number of seats. We are discussing some reasonable criteria. On that basis, adjustments will be made,” he said, adding that priority could be given to top leaders and to candidates perceived to be stronger in their respective constituencies.

He also rejected suggestions that the inclusion of NCP had unsettled his party, insisting instead that Islami Andolon stands with what he described as the pro-uprising political forces. Even so, multiple alliance sources acknowledge that rumours of Islami Andolon’s possible withdrawal circulated in recent days, reflecting the depth of unease inside the bloc.

Insiders said, Islami Andolan Bangladesh, is reportedly seeking a significant number of seats (around 120) which Jamaat leaders find difficult to accommodate, arguing that the IAB may lack strong grassroots support in many of those constituencies.

Talking to this correspondent Jamaat secretary general Mia Golam Parwar said that if any party leaves the alliance, it would not have a major impact on Jamaat’s overall strategy, as they have prepared to field candidates for all 300 constituencies if needed, but remain open to giving up some seats (up to 100) if a viable agreement is reached.

Discontent is not limited to one party. Bangladesh Khilafat Majlish, which initially sought dozens of seats, has so far reportedly secured only a small fraction of that. Its spokesperson and joint secretary general Jalaluddin Ahmed confirmed frustration among activists, saying an earlier settlement would have given candidates more time to organise.

“We are a bit behind compared to others,” he said, while expressing hope that a final decision would calm internal grievances.

Smaller partners are said to be even more constrained.
Media reports indicate Nezam-e-Islam and Khilafat Andolon have managed to secure only two seats each, while BDP and JAGPA may be left with just one constituency apiece.

The newer NCP, despite initially aiming for more than fifty seats, is currently understood to have reached provisional understanding on about two dozen.

At the same time, the bargaining has generated resentment within Jamaat-e-Islami itself. Several local leaders privately complain that accommodating partners has meant sidelining long-time Jamaat aspirants in certain constituencies, a move that risks weakening the party’s own organisational discipline during the campaign.

Behind these seat calculations lies a broader debate over influence inside the alliance. Some leaders from partner parties, speaking on condition of anonymity, allege that Jamaat’s dominance in decision-making is increasingly apparent.

However, Jamaat leaders deny this, stressing that the alliance is not structured around formal leadership positions but around a single objective: nominating one joint candidate per seat to maximise electoral prospects.
Speculation has also circulated in political circles about whether Jamaat chief Shafiqur Rahman or NCP convener Nahid Islam might effectively emerge as the public face of the alliance.

Jamaat’s assistant secretary general and media chief Ehsanul Mahbub Zubair dismissed such narratives, saying the coalition is based strictly on electoral coordination. “We are together on the basis of seat understanding. There is no conflict over posts or titles. Everyone is working on equal footing,” he said.

According to Zubair, formal discussions on seat sharing began early December. The process became more complicated, he noted, after three more parties joined late in the month, forcing negotiators to revisit earlier frameworks. By collective decision, all partners proceeded to submit nomination papers on December 29 even as talks continued.

He said meetings are now being held daily and expressed hope that a final list would be settled within days. “A committee is in contact with each party.

The principle now is not who demands what, but who is most likely to win in a given seat,” he said, while acknowledging that “naturally, not everything is matching everyone’s expectations.”

With voting scheduled for February, and with 2,568 nomination papers already submitted nationwide against 3,406 originally collected, the clock is narrowing the space for prolonged bargaining. What remains unresolved is whether the alliance can transform its shared rhetoric into a disciplined, field-ready arrangement — or whether the very diversity that broadened it will dilute its effectiveness at the ballot box.