FOR the observers of Dhaka’s politics, the chief adviser’s order regarding the implementation of the much-publicised July Charter is seen as a welcome step, after weeks of uncertainty. The charter outlines a ‘reform package’ that has gained a broader consensus of all prominent political actors in the country, except for the party of the deposed authoritarian ruler, Sheikh Hasina, the Awami League, despite some notes of dissent by some key political parties. Yet, the plans to implement the charter might emerge as a time bomb, leaving the country with more questions than answers.
The technocrat interim government formed after the fall of Sheikh Hasina regime in the early August 2024, led by Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, in attempt to fix the broken institutions of Bangladesh that allowed Sheikh Hasina to become increasingly authoritarian and fascist, formed several reform commissions to propose reforms among the key institutions, and in the constitution.
The decision to form these commissions was welcomed by all major parties, including the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. In fact, the concept of establishing commissions for reform was integral to BNP’s widely discussed 31-point programme. In the first 15 points of this programme, the BNP proposed the formation of reform commissions for constitutional, administrative, judicial, media and economic reform. These commissions were expected to submit their reports within a defined timeframe to ensure the swift implementation of their recommendations. The interim government made the party’s job easy.
However, when the proposals from the commissions were revealed, they appeared more like a utopian vision than practical solutions. In response to the growing debates, a National Consensus Commission was established, with the chief adviser serving as its leader and Professor Ali Riaz as his deputy. Negotiations took place between parties with little to no experience in managing any public office, let alone the country’s complex bureaucracy, and the BNP, a party that had governed for fifteen years since 1978. This collaborative effort helped the commission understand the realities on the ground, leading to significant modifications of many of its initial proposals to better align with the country’s context.
Some imprudent proposals persisted because of the Commission’s insistence, which appeared to be colluding with certain political groups. The BNP expressed their dissent, fearing that these proposals might lead to instability. Their concerns were acknowledged in the July Charter, which was signed in mid-October, as the Charter included a provision stating that any party disagreeing with a particular proposal would have the right to act based on its stance, provided it had secured the mandate of the people through elections and had explicitly mentioned its plan on that issue in its manifesto.
As the chief adviser announced a special order for implementing the July charter, concerns have been raised from various fronts — some publicly and some in private discussions.
The first concern on the list involves the legality of the order. Citing Article 93 of the constitution, which effectively restricts the president from altering the constitution, eminent lawyer Shahdeen Malik opined that the provisions in the order, which later became a gazette, may create constitutional complications and can be deemed unconstitutional since the gazette proposes several provisions to be taken to a referendum that are contrary to the constitution, since the constitution has been in effect and was not suspended after August 5, 2024. The concern was also raised by the ‘blue-eyed boys’ of the government, who formed the new political front, NCP, which has been against the idea of the president signing the gazette.
The next question is about the proposed referendum’s legality. After the fifteenth amendment to the constitution, which annulled the provision for holding a referendum by amending an article, the country lacks the legal basis to hold a referendum to amend the constitution. Although a court in Dhaka reinstated the provision, the decision is still pending review by the appellate division. It is currently unclear in which constitutional framework the government can hold the referendum.
Another major concern regarding the referendum is the nature of its questions and how they will be answered. The chief adviser has outlined four questions on the ballot, seeking consent for the formation of an election-time caretaker government and constitutional institutions based on the July Charter, the introduction of a bicameral parliament with 100 members elected by party vote proportion, and whether the next government should implement 30 agreed-upon proposals and other relevant ones from the Charter. Voters must either agree to all four questions or none at all, limiting their ability to express their preferences on each question.
This effort to shape voters’ opinions reflects an elitist mindset among a select group of ‘intellectuals’ who are desperately trying to impose their reform package on the public, believing their reforms are the best. Additionally, the questions posed violate the dissenting opinions submitted by parties that opposed the proposals related to the formation process of constitutional institutions and the upper house of parliament, though the July Charter stipulated that these dissenting parties could act based on their views on the matter after the election, provided that their ideas were clearly outlined in their manifestos.
Despite the concerns, most political parties appear to have accepted the interim government’s implementation plan, with the BNP welcoming the initiative. However, if the concerns regarding the referendum and the July Charter persist, they can lead the country to prolonged instability, something the country cannot afford.
Ìý
AKM Wahiduzzaman is the information and technology affairs secretary of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party.
