¶¶Òõ¾«Æ·

Legal experts, academics and professionals at a dialogue on Saturday mostly suggested rewriting the constitution, while some of them opted for reforms of the constitution during the interim government’s term in power.

Majority of the 18 speakers advocated for rewriting the constitution at the dialogue organised by the Centre for Governance Studies at the Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies auditorium.

They suggested that the constitution should be rewritten through a constituent  assembly or national convention, incorporating public opinion to prevent fascism or autocracy.

Some participants, however, argued that necessary amendments to the constitution could be made instead of entirely rewriting it.

The discussion, titled ‘Democratic reconstruction of the constitution,’ highlighted the ongoing debate over the best path forward for the nation’s governance framework.

Illinois State University professor and political scientist Ali Riaz presented a keynote paper at the discussion, arguing that the current constitution legitimised the actions and policies of the autocratic government led by fallen prime minister Sheikh Hasina.

Riaz, also a member of the advisory board of the Centre for Governance Studies, emphasised that true democratic reform was impossible without establishing a system of checks and balance, which he believed required drafting a new constitution.

He criticised the existing constitution for allowing Sheikh Hasina to simultaneously hold the positions of head of government, leader of the ruling political party, and even head of state. ‘We see no distinction between the government and the ruling political party,’ Riaz asserted.

Riaz further argued that Bangladesh experienced a drift towards individual autocracy over the past 15 years under Hasina’s rule, a shift he attributed to the powers granted to her by constitutional amendments.

He also highlighted the inability to maintain judicial independence under the current constitutional framework.

One of the coordinators of Student Movement Against Discrimination Mahfuj Alam stated that the ouster of Sheikh Hasina government led to the emergence of a new political community with people’s will being reflected by the interim administration.

Mahfuj, now a special assistant to chief adviser professor Muhammad Yunus, argued that this newly formed political community would play a decisive role in shaping the future Bangladesh.

He raised critical questions about how the interim government would continue to represent the people’s will.

Critiquing the 1972 constitution, Mahfuj pointed out its ideological bias, which he said closely aligned with the principles of the Awami League, blurring the distinction between the party and the state’s governing framework. This, according to him, eventually led to the public uprising that toppled the Awami League government.

Mahfuj rejected calls for the inclusion of the Awami League and its allies in the political process, arguing that these parties’ ideologies must first be reformed to align with the people’s will.

He emphasised the need to reconnect with the broader populace, stating, ‘We have to reach out to the masses.’

Supporting the drafting of a new constitution, Mahfuj claimed that it would not be a difficult task, as there was no fundamental difference between the will of the people in 1972 and that of 2024.

He stressed the importance of bridging these two eras, noting, ‘We must connect the will of the people of 1972 with that of 2024.’

Mahfuj further argued that the task of drafting a new constitution should not be limited to political parties but must involve various sectors of society.

He insisted that the preamble of the new constitution should honour the sacrifices made by students and others during the mass uprising.

Dhaka University’s former law student and an activist of the student movement Habibur Rahman questioned whether the present government was a constitutional government, mentioning that the government’s tenure was indefinite.

Habibur Rahman raised concerns about the legitimacy of the current government, questioning whether it could be considered constitutional.

He also cited the recent remarks by chief election commissioner Habibul Awal who stated that he could face the death penalty for failing to hold national elections within 90 days.

Habibur highlighted the constitutional requirement for elections within 90 days, arguing that no government could remain in power beyond this period without holding an election.

‘This is a government without a parliament,’ he remarked, adding that the government risked becoming similar to the one in place during the state of emergency on January 11, 2007, once the 90-day period expires.

He further argued that the interim government might not adhere strictly to the constitution, implying that a national election within 90 days was unlikely given the current political climate.

‘A new constitution is essential,’ Habibur asserted, emphasising that the aspirations of future generations could not be fully realised unless the constitution was amended periodically to reflect the will of the people.

‘We need to move beyond the basic structure of the current constitution,’ he added.

Habibur also advocated for the adoption of a ‘Second Republic’ or a new constitution to uphold the spirit of the student revolution that led to the fall of Sheikh Hasina government.

He suggested renaming the state, arguing that the title ‘Gana Prajatantri’ was inappropriate for a country not ruled by a monarchy.

Instead, he proposed the name ‘Jana Ganatantrick Bangladesh,’ which was originally suggested in the 1972 Constituent Assembly.

He proposed that a new constitution with a democratic spirit could be created through a constituent assembly, following a model similar to South Africa’s, where the interim executive, in agreement with all political parties, would draft the constitution before the national election.

To achieve this, Habibur recommended forming a national convention composed of individuals involved in the anti-fascist movement and representatives from political parties, united by the common goal of overthrowing the Awami League government.

He proposed holding a referendum to ratify the new constitution drafted by the national convention and suggested that an election could be held solely to form a constituent assembly tasked with drafting the constitution.

Political scientist and former Jahangirnagar University professor Dilara Chowdhury asserted that there was no ambiguity regarding the need for constitutional reform.

However, Dhaka University law professor Borhan Uddin Khan opposed the idea of drafting a new constitution, arguing instead that it could be amended.

He emphasised that one-third of the constitution was considered fundamental and therefore could not be altered.

Munira Khan, president of the Fair Election Monitoring Alliance, questioned the feasibility of amending the constitution without first forming an elected government.

¶¶Òõ¾«Æ· editor Nurul Kabir argued that parliament should not have the authority to draft the constitution, as its role is to legislate based on an existing constitutional framework.

He cautioned against the conflict of interest that arises when those who draft the constitution are also responsible for implementing it.

According to Nurul Kabir, in a democratic system, lawmakers should create laws based on a constitution drafted by others, underscoring the principle that sovereignty lies with the people, not the parliament.

Sujan secretary Badiul Alam Majumder supported the idea of drafting a new constitution through a constituent assembly, and suggested the removal of Article 7B, which states

that the basic provisions of the constitution are not amendable.

Supreme Court Bar Association president AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon refrained from offering an opinion on whether the constitution could be rewritten under the current government, expressing uncertainty about who would be responsible for drafting it and forming a constituent assembly.

Human rights lawyer Sara Hossain emphasised the importance of involving constitutional experts in the discussion and criticizsd the lack of representation from diverse viewpoints during the debate.

Adviser for the ministries of local government and land AF Hassan Ariff called the discussion as open-ended which would connect more people in phases to carry out the democratic reconstruction process.

Ariff, also senior lawyer and former attorney general, called the interim government as trustee saying that it would not give any decision.

‘We have to go back to the students and they will carry it on,’ Ariff said.

Lawyers ZI Panna and Dilruba Shormin, retired district judge Ikteder Ahmed, Chakma Circle chief Raja Devasish Roy, and Centre for Peace and Justice executive director Manzoor Hasan, among others, also participated in the discussion conducted by Centre for Governance Studies executive director Zillur Rahman.