By Dr. Zafar Iqbal
The results of the recent elections and referendum of February 2026 are now clear. But was this turnout truly reflective of public sentiment, or does it require deeper scrutiny, looking beyond the surface for a more rigorous assessment?
Consider a scenario in which a once-dominant party, the Awami League, was absent from the assembly ballot paper. Yet in the referendum it was effectively present, represented by the ‘No’ option. That choice was openly embraced by Awami League supporters, and its imprint can be seen in the outcome.
According to the Bangladesh Election Commission, the results of the parliamentary elections and referendum held on 12 February 2026 are as follows:
- Parliamentary Elections 2026: Seat and Vote Share
In these elections, Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League was barred, leaving the contest largely between the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and the Jamaat-e-Islami alliance.
| Political Party / Alliance | Seats (out of 299) | Vote Share (%) |
| Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Alliance | 212 | 49.97% |
| Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) Alliance (11 parties) | 77 | 31.76% |
| National Citizens Party (NCP – Student Movement) | 06 | 3.0% |
| Others / Independent Candidates | 04 | 15.27% |
- National Referendum (July Charter 2025) Results
The referendum sought public approval for the “July National Charter” and a package of constitutional reforms, including the introduction of term limits for the prime minister and the restoration of the caretaker government system.
According to the Bangladesh Election Commission, overall turnout stood at 60.26%.
The “Yes” vote, endorsing the proposed reforms, secured 48,074,429 ballots, amounting to 72.9% of the total. The “No” vote, opposing the reforms, received 22,565,627 ballots, or 27.1%.
Scientific Analysis: How Many Voters Does Each Side Truly Have?
In attempting to determine the true distribution of votes, a closer reading of the figures lends considerable weight to the previously cited “30%” argument.
First, where did the Awami League vote go? The 27.1% “No” vote in the referendum appears to represent those dissatisfied with the new system, the so-called Charter of the Revolution. This closely mirrors the estimated 25–30% core vote bank traditionally associated with the Awami League.
Second, the reality of the BNP vote. The 49.97% secured by the BNP likely comprises not only its core supporters but also voters who regarded it as the most stable or viable option in the absence of the Awami League.
Third, the rise of Jamaat-e-Islami. By winning nearly 32% of the vote, Jamaat-e-Islami has demonstrated that it has emerged as the second-largest political force in Bangladesh.
In conclusion, a data-led interpretation suggests that the BNP’s net vote bank remains in the range of 35–40%, with the remainder consisting of anti-establishment ballots or votes cast as an alternative to the Awami League. The 27% “No” vote in the referendum indicates that the Awami League’s influence has not disappeared; rather, it has been displaced from the formal electoral arena.
A deeper examination of the political dynamics further clarifies the picture. To understand the relationship between the roughly 30% “No” vote and the parties on the ballot in Bangladesh’s current context, it is necessary to consider voter psychology and the logic of strategic voting.
From a political science perspective, the 27–30% bloc largely represents hardline supporters of the Awami League, along with those who benefited from the system during its 15-year rule. These votes were cast in defence of the status quo and in opposition to the narrative of the “July Revolution”, rather than in support of an alternative ideological platform. Many of these voters view the interim arrangement and the revolutionary charter as a direct threat to their political survival.
If the 2026 election data are disaggregated along these lines, the distinction between genuine partisan support and compelled or strategic voting becomes central to understanding the real balance of power.
| Party | Total Declared Vote | Compelled Vote (AL’s share) | Genuine Supporters (Core Base) |
| BNP | ~50% | 15% – 18% | 32% – 35% |
| Jamaat-e-Islami | ~32% | 2% – 3% | 29% – 30% |
| Awami League (Hidden) | — | — | 25% – 28% |
| Others / New Forces | ~18% | 5% | 13% |
The BNP’s actual electoral weight requires careful calibration. Of the roughly 50% vote share secured by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, a substantial portion appears to have been cast not out of firm partisan loyalty but as an outcome of compulsion or tactical calculation following the exclusion of the Awami League. On this reading, the BNP’s organic or core vote bank stands closer to 35%, with the remainder reflecting strategic consolidation by voters seeking the least objectionable alternative.
By contrast, Jamaat-e-Islami seems to have consolidated a comparatively committed constituency. Its near-30% performance suggests limited reliance on borrowed or protest votes. The relative stability of its support base indicates a disciplined and ideologically aligned electorate, rather than one shaped primarily by short-term tactical shifts.
As for the Awami League, the 27–30% “No” vote in the referendum underscores that, despite its formal absence from the parliamentary contest, it remains a significant social and political force. Electoral exclusion has not translated into social erasure. The referendum figures imply that its core support remains intact, even if institutionally sidelined.
If the Awami League were permitted to contest under current conditions, Bangladesh’s political landscape would likely revert to a competitive three-way alignment, with each major force hovering around the 30% mark. The BNP’s sweeping result in the present configuration, therefore, appears less an expression of overwhelming partisan expansion and more the product of a structural vacuum created by the Awami League’s exclusion, coupled with apprehension among Awami League supporters about a potential Jamaat-e-Islami ascendancy — a framing that has also been amplified in sections of Indian media.
(The writer is involved in training and practical services in healthcare management, quality, and patient safety. His interests include public health, current affairs, IR, environmental issues, Iqbal studies, politics, and literature, can be reached at editorial@metro-morning.com)
