Image description

Professionals from various fields on Saturday expressed their frustration over the much-hyped July National Charter 2025, which was signed in a ceremony at the South Plaza of the Jatiya Sangsad on Friday.

Among the 30 political parties that took part in the National Consensus Commission dialogue for the last eight months, 24 political parties signed the charter.


Interim government chief adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus, also the NCC chair, led the signing of the charter.

Six political parties, including the National Citizen Party, the political platform of the key organisers of the 2024 July uprising, refrained from signing the state reform-centric July Charter.

Meanwhile, professionals like Supreme Court lawyers, university teachers, political analysts, health experts, right activists, and researchers observed that the signing ceremony and the July Charter itself reflected merely the opportunities sought by the political elites rather than the aspirations and rights of common people.

They further observed that the politicians should have people鈥檚 mandate to formulate the charter.

According to senior SC lawyer Shahdeen Malik,聽 changing provisions of the constitution, as outlined in the July Charter, can hardly prevent 鈥榝ascism鈥 and 鈥榓utocracy鈥 if the conventional political culture does not change.

鈥楩or the past eight months, an absurd exercise had played out in the name of consensus-building. It was like trying to reach the moon by a ladder,鈥 he said, criticising the operations of the consensus commission.

As he observed, the mass people would have felt enthusiastic about the charter if the interim government could have demonstrated success to ensure people鈥檚 well-being, at least by containing crime rates and the spiraling commodity prices.聽

Formally beginning its tasks on February 15, the consensus commission held three rounds of dialogues with more than 30 political parties. The commission presented the final version of the July Charter on October 8. It was later revised on October 17.

Jahangirnagar University鈥檚 government and politics professor KM Mahiuddin, also a constitution researcher, observed that neither the formulation of the July Charter nor the arrangement of its signing ceremony engaged the mass people.

Citing that the charter-related dialogues were confined within the political parties, he assumed that the maximum people of the country were unaware of the content of the charter when some politicians signed the document.

鈥楢n expensive signing ceremony was held at the moment when a group of teachers and July warriors 鈥 the key stakeholders of the July uprising 鈥 took to the street to push forward their demands,鈥 Mahiuddin said.

He also said that the politicians that took part in the consensus dialogue should have had people鈥檚 mandate, maybe through a referendum, to formulate the charter.聽

The July Charter consists of a prologue with a brief historical context of the reform initiatives, a list of 84 reform proposals, and a covenant by the signatory parties.聽 The 84 proposals, however, contain more than 50 dissenting notes.

Writer and political analyst Altaf聽 Parvez questioned the content of the charter, saying that the document failed to fulfil the aspirations underlying the July uprising.

鈥楾he charter has lost importance as it skipped the need for reforms in the education system and the labour sector to minimise 鈥榙iscrimination鈥 and restructuring the administration and law enforcement agencies into 鈥榟umane鈥 service providers,鈥 he said.

Oncologist Syed Md Akram Hussain, who worked as a member of the Health Reform Commission, praised the signing of the July Charter following a long series of dialogue among political parties. However, he also expressed his frustration.

He said that the formulation of the charter was important because it could bring political parties under an umbrella. But he expected that the charter could have specified the health sector as it already contained the provision for expanding the coverage of people鈥檚 fundamental rights.

鈥業f there is a scope for revising the charter, I would request to add 鈥渉ealth鈥 as a legally-protected fundamental right of the people to it,鈥 Akram said.

Rights activist Ferdous Ara Rumee said that women rights advocates had already lost enthusiasm about the July Charter as it 鈥榗ompletely鈥 skipped the recommendations from the Women Affairs Reform Commission.

She complained that the interim government did not take action against the misogynists who abused the Women Affairs Reform Commission and bullied rights campaigners for the implementation of the commission鈥檚 recommendations, including increasing the number of the reserved seats for women in the Jatiya Sangsad.

鈥楾he interim government failed to protect one of its reform commissions from abusive reaction. So there is no reason for feeling enthusiastic about the charter,鈥 Ferdous said.

Although the consensus commission had proposed to increase the number of the reserved seats for women from the existing 50 to 100, finally it backtracked amid protests from several Islamic parties.

Md Zarif Rahman, a researcher who served as a member of the Police Reform Commission, identified the lack of people鈥檚 participation as the weakest aspect of the entire consensus dialogue and the formulation of the July Charter.

鈥楾he consensus commission operated using public funds, but there was no accountability mechanism for its activities. For example, the issue of police reform was dropped without any accountability. Although political parties agreed on establishing a police commission, they did not hold the consensus commission accountable for disregarding the other recommendations made by the Police Reform Commission,鈥 Zarif said.

He also noted that none of the student representatives from the reform commissions were invited to the charter signing ceremony.

鈥楾he consensus commission did not even consider it necessary to show the basic courtesy of inviting those whose work formed the very foundation of the charter,鈥 Zarif said.