Campaign Poetry vs. Governing Prose: Examining Why Election Manifestos Lack Legal Force

The 13th National Parliament election and the referendum relating to the proposed reforms in Bangladesh is scheduled to be held on February 12 this year. The announcement of election manifestos by political parties has now become a democratic tradition around the world. Election manifesto is a political instrument in which a political party details its future policies, visions, development plans, programs, schemes etc. for the people and country. Therefore, election manifesto is a political commitment to the voters.

In reality, political parties and candidates make a lot of flurry promises before the election while on several occasions they start delaying the implementation of the pledges after being elected and forming the government. Sometimes they fulfill few significant commitments, although in other cases they often talk about various practical challenges to implement them. These manifestos are frequently exaggerated to attract voters and, in most cases, candidates make surreal promises that are beyond their legal authority to accomplish.

Media being the fourth estate can play a crucial role in the fulfillment of the pre-election promises. The political party concerned can be held accountable by the time they have assured us of accomplishing projects and regularly present their progress, plans, challenges, alternative thoughts to overcome them etc. to the citizens. Alongside, the opposition parties can constantly ask questions to the ruling party in the parliament about their pre-election commitments. Consequently, the ruling party or coalition will face continuous surveillance in fulfilling their pledges. Hence, they will be cautious to incorporate achievable commitments that can be implemented within the specific time limit with allocated resources.

As the elections approach, it is obvious that all the major political parties will make numerous pre-election pledges through their manifestos. In the age of social media and artificial intelligence, there are huge prospects that these promises will get new dimensions. As a result, accountability to carry out the pre-election pledges is more important than ever.

From past bitter experiences, the main question in the minds of the people now is whether political parties will be mindful to perform their pre-election pledges after getting power. But what should the people do if they do not fulfill their commitments? Should they wait to answer them through vote again after five years or can they enforce those promises through the courts?

In the United States, there is a mandatory obligation to pronounce the election manifesto two months before the election. Since there is no central election management body, the electoral authorities have no role in this regard. However, in Westminster democracy, parties have to state a financial provision to ensure that their manifesto is realistic and submit it to the court of audit. The election manifesto must include specific policy decisions and their financial consequences in the UK. Moreover, manifestos and other election campaign materials have to follow the rules set by the UK Electoral Commission.

On the other hand, the Election Commission (EC) of our neighboring country Bhutan necessitates all political parties to present their election manifestos before the National Assembly elections. The contents of the manifestos are then reviewed by the EC of Bhutan and, if necessary, excluded by them. Our EC can also take similar initiative by amending the law and adding power to verify whether the manifesto is consistent with democratic values ​​and constitutional spirit of the country and, if necessary, direct the party concerned to bring necessary changes.

Nevertheless, on the question of whether the election manifesto is legally enforceable by the courts, the Delhi High Court in India ruled that the election manifesto is not legally enforceable and subsequently in 2015, the Supreme Court of India dismissed an appeal against this judgment that confirmed that it is not enforceable by the courts in India.

Some legal scholars believe that election manifestos should be enforceable through the courts to enhance transparency and trust in the democratic system. The existing non-binding nature weakens accountability and transparency. Making manifestos legally binding can, at least in theory, ensure that political parties focus on meeting the actual needs of people.

Nonetheless, there are several ethical, legal, technical and practical challenges to turning election manifestos into legally enforceable contracts. This obligation will create an obstacle, if ever the need arises to form a coalition government. Question will arise as to which party's manifesto will be enforced in court? What will happen if the commitments of the parties in the coalition differ from each other?

Aside, who will be held responsible for the promises? The Prime Minister (PM) or the party/coalition chief or the policy-making forum of the party or the spokesperson who disseminated it? That will create a major complication. Additionally, what if the PM attempts to bring the relevant bill before parliament but the parliament refuses to pass it?

Furthermore, a pre-election promise may no longer be reasonable for implementation in the changed context after the election. Besides, it may not be possible to implement the promise due to various uncertainties including natural disaster, epidemic, war, internal chaos, etc. which may create a difficult situation if there is legal obligation. Due to all these practical complications, the legally binding manifesto may bring new challenges to the country against transparency and accountability.

To resolve the issue, the ruling party or coalition can be forced to comply with their own commitments through the EC. Although the affidavit that every candidate submits to the EC while submitting the nomination form has to include a description of the promises made to voters and the extent of their achievements if they have won the election in the past. But there is no system to monitor the implementation of the manifesto given by a political party. Thus, there should be mandatory provision to include along with the annual audit report of the political parties submitted to the EC regarding the extent to which the election manifesto was fulfilled, why the remainder was not attained, plans to recover the gap etc. and it should be made public. The political leaders should bear in mind that pre-election manifestos are not just the combination of few sentences articulated by them, but rather a publicly declared commitment of duties towards citizens and country. Accordingly, any breach of that will bring political consequences for them.

Published in The Business Standard as Thought on 19 January 2026.

Published in New Age as Op-ed on 22 January 2026 on page 8.