Bangladesh at the Brink: Rewriting a Nation’s Future

From time immemorial, the people of this land have been known as residents of Bulgakpur—the “City of Rebellion.” The name itself captures the essence of a nation born out of defiance. Generation after generation, Bangladeshis have risen up—against oppression, for dignity, for rights, and for freedom. It is this unyielding spirit that sets the history of this land apart from any other.

Whether it was the time before Muslim rule, the era of the Bengal Subah under the Delhi Sultanate, or the days of the independent Sultans, the story remains the same: ordinary people, standing tall in the face of injustice. During British colonialism, under Pakistani repression, and even after the 1971 Liberation War, the people of Bangladesh continued to fight. Their struggle was never just about territory—it was always about justice, identity, and respect.

The war of 1971 had overwhelming public support not only because of the brutality of the Pakistani military regime, but also because the very promise of Pakistan—equality and inclusion—was abandoned. Years of military dictatorship, exploitation, and denial of basic rights forced the people into a war they neither wanted nor could avoid. Independence came at a great cost, but even after 1971, true freedom remained elusive.

Instead of building a state rooted in the will of the people, a constitution was imposed that failed to reflect public aspirations. The years following independence were marked by political betrayal. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, once a proponent of multiparty democracy, dismantled that very system and established a one-party state through BAKSAL. He centralized power, undermining the very institutions that were meant to safeguard democracy and good governance.

The tragic events of August 15 saw Khondaker Mostaq Ahmad seize power, followed by the turbulent rise of military-backed politics. On November 7, the country witnessed the so-called National Revolution and Solidarity Day. Shaheed Ziaur Rahman tried to reconnect the state with the people, attempting constitutional reforms—but his mission was cut short by assassination, amidst conspiracies both domestic and foreign.

Following Zia’s death, H. M. Ershad rose to power—widely viewed as a puppet of a neighboring power. The people responded once again. In 1990, a historic mass uprising brought together all political parties under a shared goal: to reform Bangladesh’s broken political culture. They promised a new beginning. But once in power, those very parties abandoned their pledges.

Elections turned into spectacles of fraud—like the infamous Magura by-election. The movement for a caretaker government began, eventually leading to constitutional amendments. Yet even that system failed to change the core of Bangladesh’s political culture. Democratic institutions weakened, one by one, and politics once again became a tool of control rather than service.

After the contested 2009 election, Sheikh Hasina returned to power. The caretaker system was scrapped. Over time, her rule became increasingly authoritarian. Institutions that had barely begun to take root were dismantled. Cronyism, corruption, and nepotism soared. State-sanctioned killings, enforced disappearances, torture, and suppression became terrifyingly common. A fascist regime took shape—one that ruled not by consensus, but by fear. Then came a day that would change everything—the 36th of July.

It wasn’t just another protest. It was an uprising. A mass awakening. People from every background, every political ideology, came together to reject the decaying, authoritarian state. Under the leadership of Dr. Muhammad Yunus, this unprecedented movement wasn’t just about toppling Sheikh Hasina’s rule—it was about reclaiming the soul of the nation. This was a chance to finally do what we couldn’t in 1947. What we failed to do after 1971. What remained unfinished even after the uprising of 1990. For the first time in decades, the people have a real opportunity to rebuild Bangladesh—from the ground up—based on justice, participation, and collective hope.

Under the leadership of Professor Dr. Yunus, an interim government was formed, during which he established eleven reform commissions. Among them, the most significant is the Constitutional Reform Commission, led by Professor Ali Riaz. On February 8, 2025, the Constitutional Reform Commission, along with six other commissions, released their full reports. The report of the Constitutional Reform Commission can be analyzed from multiple perspectives.

This Commission formulated its proposals with several core objectives in mind. These proposals not only reflect the ideals of the historic Liberation War of 1971, but also resonate with the public aspirations expressed during the mass uprising of 2024. Among the key recommendations are the reduction of the Prime Minister’s absolute authority and the establishment of institutional checks and balances. Alongside this, structural measures have been proposed to counteract Bangladesh’s tainted political culture.

In the preamble of the Constitution, the Liberation War has been referred to as a "people’s war." The martyrs of the war are respectfully commemorated, and the spirit of the 2024 mass uprising is upheld. The proposal emphasizes the rights, responsibilities, and accountability of every citizen.

One of the notable suggestions in the proposed amendments is to replace the current Bangla name "Gonoprojatontri Bangladesh" with "Jonogonotantri Bangladesh" and to substitute the term "Projatontro" (Republic) with "Nagoriktontro" (Civic Democracy). However, it has been recommended that the English name—People’s Republic of Bangladesh—and the term "Republic" remain unchanged.

In Article 2, Bangla is proposed as the state language of the Civic Democracy, while also recognizing the native languages of all citizens. Instead of the prevailing concept of Bengali nationalism, the proposal introduces the idea of Bangladeshi nationalism. Articles 7A and 7B, which were inserted during a past fascist regime to block constitutional expressions of the people’s will, have been proposed for repeal.

Criticism: Political parties have already submitted their opinions in response to the proposed reforms. The proposed change to the state’s name has encountered widespread opposition. Many question the logic of replacing "Projatontro" (Republic) with "Nagoriktontro" (Civic Democracy). By definition, a republic is a state where any citizen may rise to become its leader. Thus, substituting "Republic" with "Civic Democracy" is seen as a misinterpretation of the original intent.

The reinstatement of “Bangladeshi” as the national identity is undoubtedly a welcome initiative. Bangladesh is home to over 50 ethnic minority groups. It is desirable that all inhabitants of this land—whether indigenous or Bengali—are recognized collectively as Bangladeshis. The repeal of Articles 7A and 7B is unquestionably important for a democratic state. These articles were used as a tool to obstruct constitutional reform and suppress public will, and their proposed removal marks a significant corrective action.

The current fundamental principles enshrined in Articles 8 through 12—namely nationalism (9), socialism (10), and secularism (12)—are proposed to be replaced with values rooted in the Declaration of Independence: equality, human dignity, social justice, pluralism, and democracy. Here, pluralism is defined as the peaceful coexistence and rightful dignity of people from multiple ethnicities, religions, languages, and cultures.

Criticism: The proposal of pluralism has stirred notable contention among political factions. Efforts are underway to portray pluralism as a replacement for secularism. Many fear that this concept might serve as a veiled conduit for legitimizing morally contentious issues—such as LGBTQ rights—which are seen to stand in stark opposition to the religious convictions and cultural values cherished by the majority in Bangladesh.

Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami has expressed its stance, suggesting that multiculturalism should be embraced instead of pluralism. Religious-minded communities and respected Islamic scholars have continued to voice their unwavering resistance to the notion of pluralism.

The Constitutional Reform Commission, after thoroughly reviewing the sections of the Constitution related to citizens’ rights, has proposed a comprehensive reform framework. A key recommendation is the creation of a unified charter titled Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, merging the rights currently dispersed across Parts II and III of the Constitution. This consolidated charter would be enforceable by the courts and aims to eliminate the artificial divide between socio-economic-cultural rights and civil-political rights.

The Commission has proposed the inclusion of several new fundamental rights, including:

Additionally, reforms to existing provisions have been recommended, such as:

Rather than assigning individual limitations to each right, the Commission suggests a general limitations clause based on the principles of proportionality and balance. This approach is intended to minimize the risk of arbitrary restrictions on constitutional rights.

For rights that require substantial state resources and long-term planning—such as access to food, housing, healthcare, and education—the Commission recommends a strategy of progressive realization. This would obligate the government to implement these rights based on available resources while maintaining transparency and accountability.

Criticism and Public Reaction: Despite the progressive intent behind these reforms, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) has opposed the proposals concerning fundamental rights—an unfortunate and troubling stance. As one of the country’s largest political parties, the BNP was expected to support initiatives that prioritize public welfare and democratic equity. Instead, their opposition reflects a reluctance to embrace reforms that would empower citizens and enhance state accountability, potentially indicating a desire to preserve mechanisms of authoritarian control.

Legislature: In its report, the Reform Commission has proposed replacing the existing unicameral legislature with a bicameral system. The two chambers shall be known as the National Assembly (Lower House) and the Senate (Upper House), both with a tenure of four years.

Lower House: The Lower House will comprise 400 seats. Among these, 300 members will be directly elected from single-member regional constituencies through a general vote. An additional 100 seats will be reserved for women, elected exclusively among women candidates from designated constituencies spread across all districts.

Political parties will be required to nominate candidates from among the youth for at least 10% of the total seats in the Lower House. The minimum age for contesting parliamentary elections will be set at 21 years. There will be two Deputy Speakers in the Lower House, one of whom must be nominated from the opposition. A member of parliament may not simultaneously hold the positions of Prime Minister, Leader of the House, and Head of a political party; they must choose only one role.

One of the most significant proposals pertains to Article 70. The new provision would allow members of the Lower House to vote against their party in all matters except money bills, thereby ensuring greater legislative independence. Under the current constitution, voting against the party line results in the loss of one’s parliamentary seat. It has also been proposed that the chairpersons of standing committees be selected from among the members of the opposition.

Upper House: Out of 105 seats in the Upper House, 100 will be allocated proportionally based on party representation. The remaining five seats will be filled by Presidential nomination from among representatives of socially and economically marginalized communities. To secure a seat in the Upper House through proportional representation, a political party must secure at least one percent of the total votes cast in the national election.

The Speaker of the Senate shall be elected from among its members by a simple majority vote. The Deputy Speaker, however, shall be selected from among all members of the Senate except those belonging to the ruling party.

Constitutional Amendments: Any amendment to the Constitution will require a two-thirds majority in both chambers. Once passed in both houses, the proposed amendment shall be placed before the public in a referendum. The result of the referendum will be determined by a simple majority.

International Agreements: Any international treaty that affects national interests or compromises state security must be approved by a majority vote in both chambers of the legislature prior to its execution.

Presidential Impeachment: A President may be impeached for treason, gross misconduct, or violations of the Constitution. The impeachment process shall begin with the approval of a motion in the Lower House and shall be finalized following a formal hearing in the Upper House.

Criticism and Divergent Opinions: While the proposal for a bicameral legislature has received broad consensus among mainstream political parties, differences remain on several key points. Notably, the BNP and Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami have raised objections to the proposed four-year term of both chambers, expressing a preference for retaining the current five-year term as enshrined in the existing Constitution. The NCP, however, has expressed agreement with the proposed duration.

Though the BNP supports the establishment of an Upper House, it has objected to the proposed method of electing its members. Instead, the BNP suggests that the allocation of seats in the Senate be proportionate to the number of seats a party wins in the Lower House. On the other hand, Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami advocates for a full Proportional Representation (PR) system for both the Upper and Lower Houses. Under this system, no individual candidates contest specific constituencies; rather, voters cast their ballots for parties, and seats are distributed in accordance with the percentage of votes each party receives. Regarding the 100 reserved seats for women in the Lower House, the BNP concurs with the reservation but proposes that these seats be distributed proportionally based on each party’s success in the general elections, rather than being filled through direct voting by women voters.

The BNP has also raised concerns over the requirement that political parties nominate candidates from among the youth for at least 10% of the Lower House seats. The party views this clause as ambiguous and lacking clarity. Furthermore, the BNP is not in favor of lowering the minimum age for parliamentary candidacy to 21 years. However, the party does support the provision that one of the two Deputy Speakers of the Lower House should be nominated from the opposition. It has, nevertheless, voiced objection to the clause that prohibits a single individual from simultaneously holding the positions of Prime Minister, Leader of the House, and Head of a political party. Contrastingly, Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami has proposed that individuals be allowed to hold any two of these three positions concurrently. The NCP, meanwhile, has endorsed all the proposed reforms in their entirety. A major point of contention among all parties centers around the proposed revision to Article 70, which would allow members of the Lower House to vote against their party in all matters except money bills. This proposal has met with opposition from almost all political parties. None have agreed to permit dissenting votes on money bills, constitutional amendments, or motions of confidence. Given the political context of Bangladesh, their opposition is not without merit. For instance, looking to neighboring India, the practice of horse-trading has grown alarmingly common in the wake of elections. 

Elected representatives are often sequestered in hotels by their respective parties to prevent defection. A recent example can be seen in the state of Maharashtra, where the BJP engineered defections in Sharad Pawar's NCP through his nephew, and similarly orchestrated a split in the Shiv Sena via Eknath Shinde to bring down the Maha Vikas Aghadi government and form a new administration.

In the context of Bangladesh, where foreign interference is frequently observed in various domains, including politics, it is prudent to disallow floor crossing during motions of confidence. However, in matters such as constitutional amendments and other legislative issues, members of parliament should retain the right to vote independently of party lines. Regarding the provision for referendums on constitutional amendments, the BNP does not support making referendums mandatory for all amendments. According to the party’s stance, only certain core provisions—such as the fundamental principles of the Constitution, Article 48, and the procedure for constitutional amendments under Article 142—should be subject to referendum.

In contrast, both Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami and the NCP advocate for referendums on all constitutional amendments. It is disheartening that the BNP, which had long championed the call for referendums while in opposition, now opposes the idea upon nearing the reins of power. One hopes the BNP will re-evaluate its position, recognize the value of broader consensus, and work in tandem with the Reform Commission to establish a foundation of democratic integrity. Ultimately, the aspiration remains that all parties—BNP, Jamaat-e-Islami, and the NCP—will unite in support of reforms that serve the public interest.