[🇧🇩] Everything about our constitution

[Saif]

What is constitutional reform, how this to be carried out?

The Constitution Reform Commission, formed on 6 October, will provide necessary recommendations for constitutional reforms after reviewing and evaluating the existing constitution, according to a gazette issued by the government. So the commission does not have the authority to draft a new...

en.prothomalo.com

What is constitutional reform, how this to be carried out?
Ridwanul Haque
Updated: 06 Nov 2024, 16: 44

After the successful revolution of July-August, public gathering in the National Parliament. They are now facing a new Bangladesh on 5 August.Shuvra Kanti Das

The Constitution Reform Commission, formed on 6 October, will provide necessary recommendations for constitutional reforms after reviewing and evaluating the existing constitution, according to a gazette issued by the government. So the commission does not have the authority to draft a new constitution.

The process for constitutional reform – whether through a new constitution or amendments – has not been decided yet. However, one of the main coordinators of the Students Against Discrimination (SAD) has already presented a five-point demand for state reform. Their first demand is to abolish the 1972 constitution and draft a new one.

With a few exceptions, the power and authority to create a new constitution lies with the constituent assembly or a constitution council. The power to amend the constitution rests with parliament. The 1972 constitution chose the parliamentary democracy system as the method of governance for the state.

The people were recognised as the ultimate source of power. The four fundamental principles - democracy, socialism, Bengali nationalism, and secularism - were established as the constitutional identity. The constitution safeguards the fundamental human rights of citizens and grants the High Court the power to enforce these rights.

The journey of the constitution, which promised a bright future, faltered within two years. In January 1975, through the Fourth Amendment, a one-party BAKSAL system was established. A presidential system, characterised by strong authoritarian rule, was introduced overnight. Freedom of speech, press freedom, and citizens’ rights were suspended, and the judiciary became subordinate to the president.

Was this significant change or constitutional decline a result of the weaknesses of the 1972 constitution? I believe this change was made possible by certain constitutional and extra-constitutional factors.

First, then prime minister Sheikh Mujibur Rahman misused his charismatic leadership.

Second, parliament abused its power to amend the constitution due to its majority.

Third, article 142, which outlines the process for constitutional amendments, was flawed. In that system, there was no provision for a referendum or broad public consultation before amending the constitution’s fundamental principles.

Fourth, article 70, which imposes restrictions on voting against one's party, prevented the rise of opposition voices in parliament.

Fifth, there was no democracy within the ruling party, and the “one leader, one nation” mentality encouraged nepotism in governance.

Less than seven months after the four amendments, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his family were brutally assassinated on 15 August 1975. From then until 6 December 1990, military governments ruled the country. During this period, the state was governed by a presidential system.

Between 1975 and 1990, some hopeful reforms were made to the constitution and the constitutional system. Although democracy was absent and elections were controlled and manipulated by the governing party, key reforms included giving various political parties space to engage in politics, and the formation of the BNP and Jatiya Party, which led to political competition.

Another significant change was the alteration and revision of the four fundamental principles. Instead of Bengali nationalism, Bangladeshi nationalism was introduced, which made indigenous and non-Bengali communities feel more at ease. Although controversial, the recognition of Islam as the state religion, replacing secularism, satisfied Islamist parties. However, the ruling elite made these changes primarily to serve their political interests.

Another notable reform was the introduction of a referendum for amendments to the constitution, including those concerning the form of government and other key principles.

The political plurality that emerged during this time led to the popular anti-authoritarian movement, which forced president Ershad to resign in December 1990. This culminated in the establishment of a democratic government through free and fair elections under the leadership of the interim president Shahabuddin Ahmed in February 1991. The BNP formed the government, and the Awami League emerged as a strong opposition.

In a historic and unique moment in the country's politics, all political parties agreed to reinstate the parliamentary system of governance through the 12th Amendment. This amendment also retained the provision for a referendum on constitutional amendments, albeit with some modifications.

Unfortunately, despite the promising restoration of democracy in 1991, the BNP government, towards the end of its tenure, began to manipulate the electoral system in an effort to regain power. Eventually, due to the strong stance, struggle, and firm demands of the Awami League, the BNP established a caretaker government system through the 13th Amendment.

In the 1996 elections held under this caretaker system, the Awami League won and formed the government. After the end of that government’s term, another caretaker government oversaw the 2001 elections, in which the BNP returned to power.

The next election, originally scheduled for 2006, faced complications when the BNP increased the retirement age for Supreme Court judges through the 14th Amendment. Their intention was to appoint the most senior judge, justice KM Hasan, as head of the caretaker government. The Awami League opposed this, resulting in a new political crisis.

With indirect military intervention, a caretaker government was formed. This government, which stayed in power for two years instead of the constitutionally prescribed 90 days, held parliamentary elections in December 2008. In those elections, the Awami League won by a landslide and formed the government.

From the 1991, 2001, 2006, and 2008 elections, we observed that the BNP and the Awami League alternated in power, with neither party serving two consecutive terms. After the 2008 elections, the Awami League formed the government in January 2009. Over time, prime minister Sheikh Hasina began influencing and corrupting the democratic and constitutional institutions.

Ridwanul Haque

At one point, the Awami League with an evil design unilaterally abolished the caretaker system from the constitution in 2011. This was done under pressure from the courts, which had ruled against it, and with the backing of the then chief justice, who was reportedly involved in a self-serving conspiracy. In 2010, the Supreme Court’s Appellate Division declared the caretaker government system unconstitutional, with a 4-3 verdict.

Predictably, the BNP boycotted the 2014 elections, and the Awami League formed a government through a largely unopposed, one-sided election. No opposition parties were present in Parliament, and the Jatiya Party was coerced into participating, later joining the government as a partner.

The country essentially returned to a one-party system without changing the constitution. Over the past decade and a half, Sheikh Hasina became an authoritarian leader, consolidating power through patronage networks in the party, administration, police, and other state institutions. This led to massive corruption, especially in political, financial, and constitutional areas.

The elections of 2014, 2018, and 2024 were marred by fraud, looting, and manipulation, destroying the electoral system. In the 2018 elections, the BNP was left with only 6-7 seats. Opposition parties were silenced through repression, disappearances, and killings, while millions of crores of public money were siphoned off through corrupt business networks. Like any autocrat who becomes crazy to stay in power, the ruling party Awami League, the police and the administrative officials were indulged in unlimited corruption at all levels.

In such a context, the country saw the appointment of a former officer from the controversial S Alam Group as President, who had previously served as a commissioner in the Anti-Corruption Commission.

This system is inconsistent and contradictory. In practice, neither the prime minister nor the cabinet is accountable to parliament. Judicial power lies with the judiciary, and legislative power resides in parliament, so the executive power should not be concentrated in a single individual.

In a democratic system, the prime minister holds the highest position among the executive leaders. Our current constitution deviates from this principle. Moreover, there is no limit on how many terms a person can serve as the prime minister. During the adoption of the 1972 constitution, discussions had taken place on this matter, and senior members considered the parliamentary power to remove a prime minister through a no-confidence vote as a safeguard against authoritarianism.

However, it is well-known that in our political culture, parliament lacks the opportunity to become a powerful institution. Key reasons for this include article 70, lack of internal democracy within political parties, and clan-based party politics. Another major flaw is that the constitution did not establish binding rules for political parties.

Article 70's restrictions on MPs voting freely must be abolished to ensure political pluralism and empower parliament. Two key reforms are urgently needed to ensure executive accountability and parliament’s empowerment: 1) A limit on the number of terms a prime minister can serve, and 2) Reducing parliament's term from five to four years. Additionally, the independence of the judiciary should be ensured by democratising the appointment and removal of judges and embedding this process in the constitution.

There is an important and different issue concerning the current constitution's weakness, which needs addressing: Bengali nationalism. Bengali nationalism is an authoritarian concept and is contrary to inclusive democracy and constitutionalism. The 1972 constitution failed to recognize indigenous and non-Bengali communities and excluded them from the constitutional definition of the people. The armed struggles in the Chittagong Hill Tracts in the 1970s were a direct consequence of this constitutional exclusion.

Many argue that there was no balance of power between the president and prime minister. I disagree with this opinion. In a parliamentary system, there is no need for a balance of power between the president and the prime minister. The real issue is the lack of balance of power between the legislature, executive, and judiciary. Under the current constitution, the judiciary cannot exercise its power independently, and the appointment of judges is controlled by the government. Over the years, we have witnessed the government's influence over the appointment and removal of judges.

There is no doubt that certain inherent weaknesses in the constitution have helped the prime minister become increasingly authoritarian. However, a comparison between the past 15 years of the Awami League government and the post-1990 Awami League and BNP governments presents a different picture. Under the same constitution, the government of Sheikh Hasina from 1996 to 2001 was not authoritarian. After being democratically elected in 2009, it was only after a couple of years that Sheikh Hasina gradually steered Bangladesh towards authoritarianism. The flaws in the amendment process of the constitution, which were present in the original document, were first addressed during Zia's time and later through the 12th Amendment, based on political unity.

Certain provisions of the constitution, particularly the requirement for a referendum for amendments (Article 142), were initially established. However, the Awami League government ignored this and, through the 15th Amendment, illegally altered or abolished fundamental provisions of the constitution, most notably the abolition of the caretaker government system, which amounted to a form of constitutional deception.

It wasn't just the Awami League; the BNP had also amended the constitution to serve its own interests and to undermine its opponents. Therefore, the process of constitutional amendments should be critically examined.

The current demand for a new constitution does not provide any clarity on the method. I do not believe a new constitution can be created without forming a Constituent Assembly. My reasoning for this stance is that the force and rationale behind the revolution of July (2024) is different from the force and cause of the 1971 liberation war.

After the great Liberation War of 1971, Bangladesh adopted its constitution through a Constituent Assembly (not a parliament) formed through free and fair elections. The Proclamation of Independence issued by the Constituent Assembly before the constitution came into effect on 16 December 1972, served as the temporary constitution. That constitutional assembly was formed on the basis of election.

In the current political context, if we are to create a new constitution or amend the existing one for constitutional reforms, we must move towards a broader political consensus. Political parties are essential for constitutional politics and governance. They represent the 'constitutional people' or citizens and act as agents of the people. Political parties are the foundation of democracy, and they provide the means for the people's participation in state affairs.

Therefore, in the interest of sustainable constitutional reforms, all political parties must reach a minimal consensus on two key issues: First, what reforms do they want in the constitution? Second, what method should be followed for those reforms—whether to create a new constitution or amend the existing one?

The Students Against Discrimination could play a role in encouraging and bringing political parties together. If all parties unite, a constitutional council could be formed before the next elections to begin the process of reform.

After the July revolution, we, as a nation, have truly arrived at a unique constitutional moment. This revolution, a people's uprising, is distinct from other popular movements or uprisings in post-1971 Bangladesh. However, everyone involved must remember that any constitution will only work when all the forces within society, all stakeholders, and institutions accept and abide by it. This is why we must rely on political parties and other political-social forces, and ensure the democratisation of political parties. The people must take their rightful role as the ultimate holders of state power—not as servants or subordinates of political parties or the ruling authorities.

* Ridwanul Haque: Associate Dean at a higher education institution in Melbourne; former Professor at the Department of Law, University of Dhaka.

** This article has been rewritten in English by Rabiul Islam​

 

[Saif]

‘Caretaker govt, 2-term limit for prime minister’

Propose eminent citizens to constitutional reform commission

www.thedailystar.net

‘Caretaker govt, 2-term limit for prime minister’
Propose eminent citizens to constitutional reform commission as changes

It is important to follow due process in consultation with the constitution in each step towards achieving reforms. FILE PHOTO: STAR

Eminent citizens yesterday proposed the restoration of the caretaker government and introduction of a bicameral legislature in the constitution while holding meetings with the constitutional reform commission.

They also proposed limiting the tenure of a prime minister to two terms and a balance of power between the president and the PM.

They said this while attending separate meetings held in the parliament building.

Prof Robaet Ferdous and Dilip Kumar Roy placed written proposals on behalf of Shushashoner Jonno Nagorik at one of the meetings. Later Shujan secretary Badiul Alam Majumdar explained the details of the demands.

According to the meeting sources, Shujan proposed the restoration of the caretaker system in the constitution, but the judiciary should not be included in it.

It proposed that the tenure of the caretaker government should be six months.

Shujan also made proposals regarding a prime minister not being in office for over two terms and the balance of power between the president and the PM.

It also proposed a bicameral legislation, increasing parliament constituencies to 400, of which 100 should be reserved for women. Bicameral is a type of legislature that is divided into two separate assemblies, chambers, or houses.

According to the proposal, direct elections should be held in all seats. In 200 of those seats, a proportionate representation system will be followed. The tenure of the parliament will be four years.

Shujan said the constitution should be a document of truly non-communal characteristics with the recognition of all ethnic minorities.

"The constitution is the supreme law of the state, so it must always be upheld. The Constitution can be amended in the public interest. But as long as a matter is enshrined in the constitution, it has to be followed properly," Shujan said.

The reform commission held separate meetings with Prothom Alo Editor and Publisher Matiur Rahman and The Daily Star Editor and Publisher Mahfuz Anam.

Mahfuz Anam at the meeting proposed making amendments to the constitution and not rewriting it.

He proposed the restoration of the caretaker government system, making a provision that a person cannot be the PM for more than two terms, reducing the absolute power of the PM, and giving powers to the president in some cases.

He also proposed the restoration of balances of power among the executive, legislative, and judiciary.

He also sought a bicameral parliament, while making the judiciary completely independent. A mechanism should be devised to monitor whether the judiciary is functioning properly, he said.

He also proposed making the parliament a place that will ensure accountability of the executive and forming an independent constitution commission to oversee whether the constitution is being followed properly.

The Daily Star editor also said the Anti-Corruption Commission, Human Rights Commission and Information Commission, should be made constitutional bodies and the process of appointment of the heads of these agencies should be mentioned in the constitution.

Anam also proposed ensuring freedom of expression, press and media in the constitution.

In the current constitution, the freedom of media is subjected to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interests of the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.

Anam proposed the exclusion of the rest of the issues except national security. However, the definition of the national interest should be specific, he said.

The reform commission also held meetings with Prof Salimullah Khan, political analyst Jahed Ur Rahman, mufti Saiful Islam, and mufti Abdullah Masum.

Reform commission's head Prof Ali Riaz and other members attended the meetings.​

 

[Saif]

Govt seeks to repeal most parts of 15th amendment

Attorney general Md Asaduzzaman argued before the High Court on Wednesday that the interim government wanted to declare the ousted Awami League’s 15th amendment to the constitution largely unconstitutional, retaining only select provisions...

www.newagebd.net

Govt seeks to repeal most parts of 15th amendment
Staff Correspondent 14 November, 2024, 00:12

Attorney general Md Asaduzzaman argued before the High Court on Wednesday that the interim government wanted to declare the ousted Awami League’s 15th amendment to the constitution largely unconstitutional, retaining only select provisions.

He contended that the 2011 amendment was strategically crafted to establish an authoritarian government, enabling the Awami League to retain power for an indefinite period.

Asaduzzaman, however, argued for the retention of Article 2A, which designates Islam as the state religion while ensuring equal rights for other faiths, including Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity.

He also supported retaining Article 95, governing the appointment and retirement age of Supreme Court judges, and Article 96, which establishes the Supreme Judicial Council for the removal of judges for incapacity or misconduct.

The attorney general noted that the Appellate Division had recently clarified issues related to Articles 95 and 96 in its verdict in the 16th amendment which was incorporated in the constitution in 2014 empowering the parliament to remove Supreme Court judges.

Asaduzzaman’s argument came during the final hearing of a public interest litigation challenging the legality of the 15th amendment.

On August 19, 2024, the High Court had issued a rule questioning why the 15th amendment—abolishing the caretaker government system—should not be declared unconstitutional and why actions based on it should not be invalidated.

The petitioners include prominent citizens, among others, Sushashoner Jonno Nagorik president M Hafizuddin Khan, secretary Badiul Alam Majumder, and local government expert Tofail Ahmed.

The bench of Justice Farah Mahbub and Justice Debasish Roy Chowdhury adjourned the hearing until Thursday.

In his arguments, the attorney general claimed that the 15th amendment was designed to entrench Awami League eventually ousted in a student-led uprising on August 5 this year.

He asserted that the amendment undermined democratic principles, the independence of the judiciary, and fundamental rights, allowing suppression of opposition through extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, and politically motivated cases.

Asaduzzaman pointed to controversial provisions within the amendment, such as the classification of citizens as ‘Bangalees’ or ‘Bangladeshis’ and the formal recognition of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as the ‘Father of the Nation’—a designation absent in the original constitution.

He noted that under the amendment, derogatory remarks against Sheikh Mujib were now treated as treasonous offences.

The attorney general also criticised Article 7A, which criminalises any attempt to repeal, suspend, or subvert the constitution through force or unconstitutional means, prescribing capital punishment for sedition. He argued that this restriction limits democratic change and disregards the recent mass uprising that deposed the Awami League government.

Further, Asaduzzaman expressed opposition to the amendment’s emphasis on socialism and freedom from exploitation as fundamental state principles, stating that socialism was not part of the constitution’s original structure.

He also objected to Article 8(1), which enshrines nationalism, socialism, democracy, and secularism as foundational state policies, and Article 9, which defines citizens as ‘Bangalees’ on the basis of Bangalee nationalism.

Asaduzzaman argued that the mother tongues of the national minority people were denied by calling them ‘Bangalees’.​

 

[Saif]

Constitution must ensure fundamental rights, professionals tell commission

Representatives from several professional bodies on Thursday recommended that the constitution make the fulfillment of the citizens’ fundamental rights binding for the state...

www.newagebd.net

Constitution must ensure fundamental rights, professionals tell commission
Staff Correspondent 15 November, 2024, 00:29

Representatives from several professional bodies on Thursday recommended that the constitution make the fulfillment of the citizens’ fundamental rights binding for the state.

The recommendation came at a meeting of the constitution reform commission with the representatives of these professional bodies and constitution experts that was held as part of the commission’s preparation for drafting reform proposals to submit to the interim government chief adviser by January 4, 2025.

Thursday’s was the fourth in a series of meetings the commission is holding with different groups for the purpose.

According to the commission, National Press Club president Hasan Hafiz, Doctors’ Association of Bangladesh organising secretary Sayeed Mehbub Ul Quadir, Doctors Platform for People’s Health vice president Faizul Hakim and member Md Harun-Rashid, Justice Abdul Matin, lawyer Hasnat Quaiyum, professor K Shamsuddin Mahmud and Law Commission adviser AK Mohammad Hossain spoke at the discussion.

Faizul Hakim told New Age that he demanded constitutional provisions that would make ensuring fundamental rights, including public health, of the citizens legally binding for the state.

He also proposed that the country get a fresh constitution as the existing one, which originated in 1972, had transformed the state system into a monster.

‘However, there needs to be an elected body to write the new constitution. The reform proposals from the interim government would guide its drafting,’ Faizul said.

Talking to New Age, lawyer Hasnat Quaiyum said that he recommended that the reformed constitution would free fundamental rights from any terms and conditions.

‘The Article 149 of the existing constitution gives legal acceptance to all the pre-independence acts. The reform commission must propose removal of all rights violating acts,’ Hasnat said.

He also recommended transfer of the management of both the crime investigation and jail system to the judiciary from the police department which is currently responsible for both.

Commission chief professor Ali Riaz and members Dhaka University professors Sumaiya Khair and Muhammad Ekramul Haque, lawyers Imran Siddique , Sharif Bhuiyan and M Moin Alam Ferozi, writers Firoz Ahmed and Md Mustain Billah were present during the meeting.​

 

[Saif]

Professionals for power balance between president, PM

Leaders of six professional bodies on Sunday urged the Constitution Reform Commission to recommend measures aimed at rebalancing powers between the president and the prime minister as well as fortifying the judiciary and local government systems...

www.newagebd.net

Professionals for power balance between president, PM
Staff Correspondent 18 November, 2024, 00:06

Leaders of six professional bodies on Sunday urged the Constitution Reform Commission to recommend measures aimed at rebalancing powers between the president and the prime minister as well as fortifying the judiciary and local government systems.

The call came during meetings with the commission.

Cultural, rights activists and ethnic minority activists also met with the commission on the day.

The meetings held in the Cabinet Room of the Parliament building were presided over by commission chairman professor Ali Riaz.

Several participants confirmed New Age that the professional leaders emphasised the need for comprehensive constitutional reforms to address systemic imbalances and enhance governance.

They urged the commission to submit actionable recommendations to the interim government, reflecting these priorities.

Their meetings underscored growing calls from the civil society for a more accountable and balanced governance structure in Bangladesh.

Emerging from their meeting with the commission, Supreme Court Bar Association president AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon said that they recommended amendment of the present constitution to restore the non-party caretaker government, ensure balance between the powers of the prime minister and the president, and strengthen the local government system.

The Supreme Court Bar Association also emphasised at the meeting strengthening of the judiciary and framing rules for appointment of Supreme Court judges as part of the strengthening of the judiciary.

He said that the students led the movement against discrimination, but they had no mandate to reform the state. Reforming the state is a political action which the interim government did not have the mandate to do, he added.

This revolutionary government can make arrangement for political dialogues over the proposed reform work for creating consensus among the political parties, he added.

Mahbub Uddin Khokon further said that the political parties should reach a consensus that whoever would come to power would bring the recommended reforms in the first or second session of the parliament.

People might cast doubt about the interim government’s intention if they became busy with the reform activities instead of doing day to day work, he said.

The professional bodies represented in the meetings were—Supreme Court Bar Association, represented by its president AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon and executive member Shafiqul Islam; Bangladesh Federal Union of Journalists, represented by its secretary general Kader Gani Chowdhury and treasurer Shahidul Islam; Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of Commerce Industry, represented by Nasrin Begum, Chowdhury Mokimuddin KJ Ali, Jamil Uddin Milton; Institution of Diploma Engineers, represented by Kabir Hossain and Gias Uddin; Garment Shramik Sanghati, represented by its leaders Anjan Das, Mizanur Rahman Chowdhury and Sabina Yasmin; and Bangladesh Institute of Planners, represented by its president Adil Muhammad Khan.

In separate meetings on the day, representatives of indigenous communities also met with the Constitution Reform Commission, urging the removal of terms like ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘tribal’ from the constitution.

They called for these terms to be replaced with ‘indigenous people’ in any proposed constitutional amendments or rewrites, emphasising the importance of accurate and respectful recognition of their identity.

The representatives included Chittagong Hill Tracts Citizen Committee member Nirupa Dewan, former Human Rights Commission member Hari Purna Tripura, and Bangladesh Indigenous People Network leaders Gipishan Kumar Suchiang and Nabadeep Kumar.

Singer Asif Akbar, cultural activist Sarwar Tushar, rights activists Maha Mirza, Arup Rahi, Imran Mahfuz, Syed Nizar, lawyer Arif Khan, ethnic minority rights activist Ilira Dewan, and Dipak Kumar Goswami also had meetings with the commission on the day.

Commission members professors Sumaiya Khayer and Muhammad Ekramul Haque, lawyers Sharif Bhuiyan, Imran Abdullah Siddiq, and Mohammad Moyeen Alam Firozee, writer Firoz Ahmed and right activist Md Mustain Billah were present at the meeting.​

 

[Saif]

Constitution Reform Commission: IRI delegation calls on Prof Ali Riaz

A three-member delegation from the International Republican Institute (IRI) paid a courtesy visit to Prof Ali Riaz, the head of the Bangladesh Constitution Reform Commission today

www.thedailystar.net

Constitution Reform Commission: IRI delegation calls on Prof Ali Riaz

Photo: Collected

A three-member delegation from the International Republican Institute (IRI) paid a courtesy visit to Prof Ali Riaz, the head of the Bangladesh Constitution Reform Commission today.

Dr Geoffrey Macdonald, senior advisor for the Asia-Pacific region, led the delegation while Joshua Rosenbaum, acting resident program director (Bangladesh Program) of IRI, and Stephen Chima, regional director (South Asia) were the other two members of the delegation who met him the commission at its office.

During the meeting, Prof Riaz briefed the delegation on the current activities and plans regarding constitutional reforms.

He informed them that the commission has already engaged in discussions with 28 organisations, 23 representatives of civil society, five constitutional experts, and 10 young thinkers.

Additionally, public opinions on constitutional reforms are being collected through the commission's website.

As of this afternoon, a total of 47,097 opinions have been submitted. A nationwide public opinion survey, facilitated by BBS, is also set to commence soon.

Dr Geoffrey Macdonald said that the organisation is committed to promoting democratic practices worldwide and expressed interest in collaborating with the emerging Bangladesh.

The delegation also showed particular interest in the commission's approach to incorporating stakeholder opinions into the reform process.​

 

[Saif]

Constitution reform: Hindu Bouddha Christian Oikya Parishad submits proposal

On behalf of Bangladesh's religious and ethnic minority communities, the Bangladesh Hindu Bouddha Christian Oikya Parishad submitted several proposals to the online portal of the Constitution Reform Commission today

www.thedailystar.net

Constitution reform: Hindu Bouddha Christian Oikya Parishad submits proposal

On behalf of Bangladesh's religious and ethnic minority communities, the Bangladesh Hindu Bouddha Christian Oikya Parishad submitted several proposals to the online portal of the Constitution Reform Commission today.

Among the proposals, the council emphasised maintaining the existing preamble of the Constitution without alteration.

They added that the preamble ensures the rule of law, fundamental human rights, and political, economic, and social equality, liberty, and justice for all citizens, regardless of religion, race, or ethnicity.

The council recommended the complete abolition of Article 2A of the Constitution, which declares a "state religion."

They argued that this article is entirely contradictory to the core principles of the Constitution's preamble, which guarantees the rule of law, fundamental human rights, and political, economic, and social equality, liberty, and justice for all citizens.

The article, they said, relegates religious and ethnic minorities to the status of second-class citizens.

The council also proposed retaining the article on "Secularism and Freedom of Religion" without amendment, arguing that it upholds the character and essence of a secular state, ensuring inclusivity for all citizens, irrespective of religion, race, or ethnicity, which is a fundamental principle of the Constitution.

Regarding Article 28 of the Constitution, the Council advocated for its retention in its entirety.

They highlighted the necessity of enacting a Minority Protection Act, establishing a National Minority Commission, and forming a Ministry of Minority Affairs to eliminate existing discrimination against religious and ethnic minorities.

They asserted that these proposals are essential for addressing inequalities faced by minorities in society and for ensuring equal protection under the law.

The Council further proposed adding clauses to Article 28. Clause (5) would constitutionally guarantee adequate representation and participation of religious and ethnic minorities in various constitutional bodies, such as the National Parliament, the Election Commission, the National Human Rights Commission, and the Public Service Commission. Clause (6) would ensure proportional representation of religious and ethnic minorities in the National Parliament based on population demographics.

Meanwhile, the Judicial Reform Commission, led by its chairman, Justice Shah Abu Nayeem Mominur Rahman, former Justice of the Appellate Division, met with the Constitution Reform Commission at the office of the Judicial Reform Commission yesterday.

Representing the Constitution Reform Commission was its chairman, Prof Ali Riaz, along with members Imran Siddiq, Prof Muhammad Ekramul Haque, Sharif Bhuiyan, Senior Advocate M Moin Alam Firozi, and writer Firoz Ahmed.

The other members of the Judicial Reform Commission were present at the meeting.

During the meeting, both commissions briefed each other on the progress of their respective tasks.

The discussion focused on various constitutional matters, particularly those related to the judiciary, and highlighted the need for coordination between the two commissions' work and recommendations.​

 

[Saif]

BNP submits 62 proposals to Constitutional Reform Commission

The Bangladesh Nationalist Party on Tuesday gave a 62 reform proposals for the constitution that included the reintroduction of the election-time caretaker government, bicameral parliament, provisions aimed at power balance between the prime minister and the president, and introduction of the...

www.newagebd.net

BNP submits 62 proposals to Constitutional Reform Commission
Staff Correspondent 26 November, 2024, 14:27

BNP standing committee member Salahuddin Ahmed speaks a to journalists after submitting a total of 62 proposals to Constitutional Reform Commission at the Parliament building in Dhaka on Tuesday. | UNB photo

The Bangladesh Nationalist Party on Tuesday gave a 62 reform proposals for the constitution that included the reintroduction of the election-time caretaker government, bicameral parliament, provisions aimed at power balance between the prime minister and the president, and introduction of the vice president and deputy prime minister.

A two-member delegation, led by the party’s standing committee member Salahuddin Ahmed, submitted a copy of the proposals to Constitution Reform Commission chief professor Ali Riaz at the national parliament building in Dhaka.

The Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, meanwhile, is going to launch a nationwide survey to get public opinions regarding the constitutional reform, Ali Reaz said, adding the findings would help his commission to have a comprehensive view on the issue.

After submitting the BNP proposals on the day, Salahuddin told reporters that his party proposed amendments in the constitution in 62 places, starting from its preamble to the schedule.

He said that his party prepared the proposals keeping in mind the aspirations of the country’s people and the blood pledge of the martyrs of the July-August mass uprising, and to prevent the rise of parliamentary dictatorship in the future.

It has further proposed provisions barring a person to hold the prime minister position more than twice in a row.

‘The BNP has also proposed the creation of an upper house in the parliament, bringing the subordinate courts under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and reintroduction of the referendum provision,’ Salahuddin Ahmed said.

The BNP standing committee member said that all issues, including republic, executive, judiciary, law, election commission, and schedule, were addressed in the proposal so that the reformed constitution outlined a truly democratic system. ‘We have proposed provisions enabling a balance of power in all the state organs,’ he said.

When asked about the recent discussion on rewriting of the constitution, he said that their proposal was for comprehensive amendment of the constitution. ‘We want amendment to transform it to a democratic constitution to fulfil people’s desire,’ he said.

Later, Ali Riaz said that the statistical bureau after doing the survey would give its report to his commission.

‘This survey will help us know the views of all types of people, urban, rural, elderly and young, from all over the country,’ he explained.

The professor, however, noted that the constitution was not only about elections.

‘We will make recommendations for the constitutional reforms regarding elections based on the opinions we would receive from the public,’ he said.

‘When the election will be, and in what process are the matters on which only the government has the say. It’s not something the Constitution Reform Commission can talk about,’ Ali Riaz added.

Mentioning that more than 50,000 opinions had been received from the constitution reform website, he said, ‘We have continued discussions with the stakeholders. We will also talk to some other organisations and leaders.’​

 

[Saif]

A multi-racial, multi-cultural, gender sensitive constitution

Representatives from civil society and different organisations yesterday proposed for a multi-racial constitution that will acknowledge multiple languages, cultures, religions, and gender sensitivity.

www.thedailystar.net

A multi-racial, multi-cultural, gender sensitive constitution
Propose civil society, orgs to reform commission

Representatives from civil society and different organisations yesterday proposed for a multi-racial constitution that will acknowledge multiple languages, cultures, religions, and gender sensitivity.

They also suggested allowing people with dual citizenship to run for the position of Member of Parliament but not to hold top-level executive positions.

They placed their proposals before the constitutional reform commission led by Prof Ali Riaz, during a meeting that was part of its ongoing stakeholder consultations. The meeting was held at the National Parliament Building.

Justice Iman Ali, Chief of the Chakma Circle Devasish Roy, and Prof Md Robiul Islam gave recommendations on constitutional reforms.

Talking to The Daily Star, Devasish Roy said he proposed to include indigenous people in the constitution-drafting process to ensure that they, too, feel ownership of the constitution.

He also proposed that the preamble of the constitution should recognise the historical role of the people of different ethnic, religious, linguistic, and other backgrounds, alongside marginalised groups, who have been defending the integrity of the country's territory for centuries and nurturing its biodiversity.

"Some of the fundamental principles should be included as fundamental rights so that they are judicially enforceable, like rights to healthcare, food and nutrition, and quality education," he said.

He also demanded that Article 36 should be amended to acknowledge the need to provide reasonable restrictions to the acquisition of land ownership rights in tribal areas in the CHT and plains.

He recommended incorporating laws like the 1900 Regulations and post-CHT Accord laws of 1998 (on regional and district councils), which protect indigenous people, into the first schedule of the constitution.

Prof Mirza Taslima and Kazi Maruful Islam, representing the University Teachers' Network, also proposed several recommendations.

Contacted, Prof Taslima said she emphasised making the constitution multi-racial and acknowledging diverse languages, cultures, religions, and gender sensitivity in the constitution, while Prof Maruful talked about how the parliament should be.

Roman Uddin and Apon Zahir from the Centre for Governance Studies also presented their proposals.

Speaking to the newspaper, Apon Zahir said they suggested that elections should only be considered legitimate if voter turnout exceeds 51 percent.

He reiterated the proposal to allow individuals with dual citizenship to run for parliament but not hold top executive roles.

They recommended recognising indigenous identities in the constitution.

They also recommended explicitly declaring all forms of discrimination against indigenous peoples, as well as religious and ethnic minorities, illegal.

The organisations and representatives attending the meeting included Akhtar Hossain Khan from the Newspaper Owners' Association of Bangladesh (NOAB); Sanjida Islam Tulee and Mushfiqur Rahman Johan from Mayer Dak; Tamanna Singh Baraik and Puja Rani from the Dalit Women's Forum; Nadira Parveen and Sultan Md Salauddin Siddique from Nagorik Udyog; Joya Shikder and Sudip Kumar Das from Sampurna; Md Junaid and Mohammad Millat Hossain from the Bangladesh Judicial Service Association; and Nazma Akter from the Combined Garment Workers' Federation.

Members of the commission present at the meeting included Prof Sumaiya Khair, Barrister Imran Siddiq, Prof Mohammad Ikramul Haque, Barrister M Moin Alam Firozi, Firoz Ahmed, and Md Mustain Billah.​

 

[Saif]

Democratic rewrite of constitution

THE call for constitutional change in Bangladesh has intensified, not merely for refinement but as a profound demand for democratic renewal. Reforming the 1972 constitution within its current framework overlooks a critical reality: the document is itself embedded with principles that have...

www.newagebd.net

Democratic rewrite of constitution
Kazi ASM Nurul Huda 16 December, 2024, 00:00

THE call for constitutional change in Bangladesh has intensified, not merely for refinement but as a profound demand for democratic renewal. Reforming the 1972 constitution within its current framework overlooks a critical reality: the document is itself embedded with principles that have enabled authoritarianism rather than safeguarded against it, which contradicts the spirit of Bangladesh’s 1971 liberation war. The question now is whether a complete rewrite is necessary to eliminate entrenched authoritarian elements to create a future rooted in the values of equality, human dignity and social justice that inspired the nation’s fight for independence.

This debate on reforming versus rewriting goes beyond semantics; it signifies fundamentally different intentions that shape the extent of change. Reform implies a focused attempt to improve specific areas within an existing framework, with the assumption that the foundation is sound but needs updates to address new or evolving needs. In contrast, rewriting signifies a complete rethinking of the entire structure, often suggesting that the current framework is fundamentally flawed, misaligned or outdated.

The choice to rewrite raises questions of intent and often sparks resistance, as it implies inherent flaws in the original document. Supporters of rewriting Bangladesh’s 1972 constitution argue that certain provisions promote authoritarianism, a drift so deeply embedded that only a full overhaul can eliminate this risk. This stance, while contentious, argues that the current constitution is incompatible with modern democratic ideals and requires a new foundation rather than incremental updates.

In contrast, reformation aims to refine or strengthen the existing framework without replacing it entirely. Proponents of constitutional reformation in Bangladesh argue that careful adjustments to select provisions can mitigate authoritarian risks while preserving the essence of the 1972 Constitution. By respecting the original intentions of its framers, reformation offers continuity and proposes a constructive way forward without discarding the document’s core values.

The debate around the constitution also touches a deeper historical chord. The central question surrounding the 1972 constitution is whether it genuinely embodied the high ideals of equality, human dignity, and social justice set forth in paragraph 12 of the 1971 Proclamation of Bangladesh Independence, issued on April 10, 1971, by the provisional government of Bangladesh in Mujibnagar. Although these values appear in the constitution’s preamble, they were not codified as core state principles. Instead, the constitution adopted four guiding pillars — nationalism, socialism, democracy and secularism — that were not part of the original Proclamation. This substitution, ostensibly to uphold the Liberation War’s spirit, may have instead distorted it. For a document foundational to national identity, it is crucial to question why these ideals were replaced and who stood to benefit from this shift.

The long-term consequences of these decisions have grown clearer over time. By embedding the four pillars as the constitution’s core, the framers arguably created a framework that allowed for authoritarian practices in Bangladesh’s politics over the past 50 years. The extended rule of the Awami League from 2009 to 2024 illustrates how these principles have facilitated power consolidation and created a system that prioritises specific political interests over true democratic representation.

A constitution that repeatedly enables authoritarianism likely has inherent issues. The constitution’s foundational pillars have justified selective policies that favour certain interests, compromise freedom of expression, and restrict economic opportunity. Nationalism, for example, has been invoked to justify policies that limit dissent, while secularism, though intended for harmony, has restricted political expression. Similarly, socialism, meant to promote equality, has sometimes justified restrictive economic policies. These foundational principles have promoted an environment where authoritarianism can take root and thrive.

When the foundational principles themselves allow authoritarian drift, reform alone is unlikely to deliver the transformative change that Bangladesh needs. Isolated amendments might temporarily curb authoritarian tendencies but cannot reshape a framework that ultimately prioritises certain interests over democratic will. Even an extensively revised 1972 constitution would still carry the weight of principles misaligned with democratic ideals. Under these circumstances, reform risks becoming a superficial fix when a fundamental shift is essential. The entrenched values that permeate and compromise the entire document suggest that only a comprehensive rewrite could enable the constitution to authentically reflect the original ideals of the liberation war, ideals that serve neither any particular person’s interest nor any party’s ideology.

Though rewriting a constitution is a significant undertaking requiring thorough justification, the way the 1972 constitution embeds elements that diverge from the Liberation War’s spirit — elements that cater to specific interests over a genuinely inclusive national ethos — suggests that rewriting may be more appropriate than simple or substantial reformation. A rewritten constitution could better align with the ideals of the 1971 Proclamation and more effectively support democratic governance.

What would a rewrite of the constitution entail, and why is it necessary? A comprehensive constitutional rewrite would mean re-examining each element of the document to build a democratic framework from the ground up. This new constitution would need to incorporate the ideals of equality, human dignity, and social justice that inspired the Liberation War and implement safeguards to prevent power consolidation. By starting anew, Bangladesh could craft a constitutional framework that genuinely respects the aspirations of its people rather than historical political interests.

A new constitution would also serve as a symbolic reaffirmation of the liberation war’s values, honouring those who sacrificed for these ideals. This symbolic aspect is no less important than the legal ramifications, as it represents a collective reimagining of national identity and purpose.

Creating a new constitution, however, is not simple. It requires broad consensus, thoughtful debate, and transparency involving diverse voices across Bangladeshi society to ensure that the new document reflects the will of the people rather than a single political ideology or interest. In this way, a new constitution could serve as a bulwark against the cycle of authoritarian governance that has plagued Bangladesh’s history.

While it’s true that a constitution alone, however perfect it is, cannot guarantee democracy, it does provide the essential framework upon which democratic culture and public commitment to democratic principles can grow. Some might argue that rewriting Bangladesh’s constitution risks greater instability in an already politically volatile nation. However, much of the current instability stems from authoritarian abuses embedded in the existing constitutional structure. A new constitution, with strong democratic checks and balances, could actually serve as a stabilising force by dismantling mechanisms that allow power consolidation and political centralization. This foundational change would give Bangladesh a chance to build a political environment rooted in democratic integrity. It would create the essential space for political culture, education, and public awareness to flourish around democratic values instead of being eroded by partisan interests.

In fine, the case for a new constitution in Bangladesh is not merely about legal reform but about reimagining the nation’s political identity. Crafting a document that embodies the genuine spirit of the liberation war and the principles of a democratic society would pave the way towards a future free from authoritarianism. The question, then, is no longer merely whether the constitution needs reform but rather how it should be rewritten to lay the foundation for a genuinely democratic Bangladesh and who is entitled to undertake this task.

Kazi ASM Nurul Huda is an associate professor of philosophy at the University of Dhaka. He holds a PhD in philosophy from the University of Oklahoma, USA.​

 

[Saif]

Reviving caretaker govt system reflects people’s expectations: Shahdeen Malik

'It will pave the way for a more democratic Bangladesh,' said the constitution expert

www.thedailystar.net

Reviving caretaker govt system reflects people’s expectations: Shahdeen Malik

Eminent jurist Shahdeen Malik today said reviving the caretaker government system certainly reflects people's expectations.

"It will pave the way for a more democratic Bangladesh," said the constitution expert in his impromptu reaction to The Daily Star after a High Court verdict on the 15th amendment of the constitution.

The HC today scrapped a part of the constitution's 15th amendment that cancelled the provision of the non-party caretaker government system and restored the provision of the referendum for bringing any amendment to the constitution.

The abolition of the non-party caretaker government system is void and unconstitutional as it destroyed democracy, free and fair elections, and the independence of judiciary which are the basic structures of the constitution, the court said.

Delivering the verdict on two separate writ petitions, the HC also struck down articles 7(A) and 7(B) of the Constitution, declaring them void and unconstitutional.

"Bringing back the provision for referendum is also certainly a welcome decision," said Shahdeen.

"Articles 7(A) and 7(B) were in conflict with the constitution, so it was expected that these would be declared unconstitutional," he added.


Article 7(A) of the Constitution pertained to the use of force and other unconstitutional means to "abrogate, repeal or suspend" the Constitution or any of its articles.

Article 7(B) makes certain parts of the Constitution unamendable "by way of insertion, modification, substitution, repeal or by any other means".

The HC declared unconstitutional the parts of the 15th Amendment Act, which scrapped the 13th amendment that had introduced the non-party caretaker government system in 1996, and brought significant changes to the charter.

In the verdict, the HC did not interfere in the provisions of the 15th Amendment Act which deals with the state principles including secularism, socialism, state region, nationalism, father of the nation and the number of reserved seats for women in parliament, saying that the future governments will decide these issues.

The 15th Amendment was passed in the parliament in 2011.​

 

[Saif]

Scrapping caretaker government system unconstitutional: HC

HC also restored provision for referendums for constitutional amendments; repealed articles 7A, 7B; upheld state principles

www.thedailystar.net

Scrapping caretaker government system unconstitutional: HC

HC also restored provision for referendums for constitutional amendments; repealed articles 7A, 7B; upheld state principles

The High Court today scrapped a part of the constitution's 15th amendment that cancelled the provision of the non-party caretaker government system and restored the provision of the referendum for bringing any amendment to the constitution.

The abolition of the non-party caretaker government system is void and unconstitutional as the abolition has destroyed democracy, free and fair elections, independence of judiciary which are the basic structures of the Constitution, the court said.

Delivering verdict on two separate writ petitions, the HC also struck down articles 7 (A) and 7 (B) of the Constitution, declaring them void and unconstitutional.

Article 7 (A) of the Bangladesh Constitution pertained to the use of force and other unconstitutional means to "abrogate, repeal or suspend" the Constitutions or any of its articles.

Article 7 (B) makes certain parts of the Constitution unamendable "by way of insertion, modification, substitution, repeal or by any other means".

The HC declared unconstitutional the parts of the 15th Amendment Act, which scrapped the 13th amendment that had introduced the non-party caretaker government system in 1996, and brought significant changes to the charter.

In the verdict, the HC did not interfere in the provisions of the 15th Amendment Act which deals with the state principles including the secularism, socialism, state region, nationalism, father of the nation and number of reserved seats for women in parliament, saying that the future governments will take the decision about these issues.

The court also clarified the current interim government is not a caretaker government.

It said the present government government is totally different as it was formed by the president after he sought the opinion of the Appellate Division of Supreme Court under article 106 of the constitution.

Article 106 says, "If at any time it appears to the President that a question of law has arisen, or is likely to arise, which is of such a nature and of such public importance that it is expedient to obtain the opinion of the Supreme Court upon it, he may refer the question to the Appellate Division for consideration and the division may, after such hearing as it thinks fit, report its opinion thereon to the President."

The High Court bench of Justice Farah Mahbub and Justice Debasish Roy Chowdhury delivered the verdict following two separate writ petitions challenging the constitutionality of the 15th amendment to the constitution.

On December 5, the bench fixed today as the date for the announcement of the judgement after concluding hearings on the petitions.

The court has heard arguments on the petitions for 12 working days. One of the writ petitions was filed by Mofazzal Hossain, a freedom fighter from Narayanpara, Naogaon.

On October 19, the HC bench led by Justice Farah Mahbub issued a rule asking the government to explain why the Constitution (15th Amendment) Act, 2011, should not be declared unconstitutional. It also questioned why actions taken under the amendment should not be invalidated.

On August 19, another HC bench led by Justice Naima Haider, who is currently on leave, issued a similar rule following a writ petition filed by five citizens.

The petitioners included – Badiul Alam Majumdar, secretary of Shushashoner Jonno Nagorik, along with Tofail Ahmed, M Hafizuddin Khan, Md Jobirul Hoque Bhuiyan, and Zahrah Rahman. The petitioners, submitting their case as a public interest litigation, argued that the abolition of the non-party caretaker government system through the 15th amendment led to three consecutive disputed elections in 2014, 2018, and 2024.

Apart from the writ petitioners and the state, few political parties, including BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami and some SC lawyers have placed arguments before the HC against the 15th amendment and in favour of the caretaker government system.​