The reform conundrum

The rubric reform is not new to Bangladesh. In the past, whenever an unelected government took office, reform of various sorts gained currency. Whether this was a ploy to divert public attention from illegal use of power or a genuine desire to improve matters germane to day to day governance and for giving democracy a shot in the arm, remained problematic.

Both the governments of president Ziaur Rahman and General Ershad introduced administrative reforms to facilitate lateral entry into civil administration. President Ershad went further and  decentralised field level administration. The interim government that took office after the 'one eleven' political change in 2007 launched a vigorous anti-corruption campaign that saw political    bigwigs landing in jail. Significant reforms were carried out to correct the voter list and to ensure free and fair election.

After the historic 'July' uprising in 2025 that overthrew the autocratic and corrupt  regime  of Sheikh Hasina  it was natural  for  those in the vanguard of the movement and public in general to expect  qualitative changes in the institutions on which the edifice of  state rests. After the nationwide upheaval against the autocratic regime, people did not expect the country to run on 'business as usual' mode. It was not only building democracy in its pristine form through fair election that was flagged but also resuscitating the organs of state. In response to popular aspirations, six reforms commissions were formed by the present interim government to make recommendations for reforms in six sectors vital for regeneration of state organs and government ministries. There could be a few more commissions but the eight hit the bull's eye, so to say. The subjects covered by the terms of reference of the Commissions ranged from women's rights to changes in the present constitution. The manner in which the commissions went about completing the tasks assigned to them was exemplary. It soon became evident that all the members and chairmen of the commissions felt the weight of history resting on their heads. Rare are the occasions that arise in the life of a nation to make amends for acts of omissions and commissions. The state of Bangladesh was in the cusp of radical transformation and the interim government could not be oblivious of the opportunity that had arisen following the fall of the tyrannical and venal regime of Hasina.

Having received the recommendations of the Commissions the interim government very pragmatically formed a Consensus Commission to hold dialogues with the registered political parties to reach unanimity on the recommendations of the Commissions. It is learnt that consensus has been reached by 26 political parties regarding 84 recommendations. The July Charter is going to be announced on the basis of this consensus.  So far so good. But the bone of contention is on the implementation procedure. Here the major political parties have divergent views. BNP is in favour of implementing recommendations having constitutional implications by the next elected parliament. Jamat-E -Islam is of the opinion that such recommendations can be adopted by presidential proclamations.  While the newly formed NCCP wants a constituent assembly to discuss and adopt the recommendations. They want the election to the parliament and the constituent assembly to be held at the same time. So, there are three different views regarding the implementation procedure. Unless consensus is reached soon on the issue of implementation there is every likelihood of general election being postponed. 

Of the three options the one that envisages general election and referendum on the reform proposals to be held at the same time on the same ballot paper appears to be the most pragmatic on the following grounds:

• It will be the most cost effective for the government as the expenses for holding the election and the referendum will be the same. The only additional cost will be for counting and tallying the votes on the referendum. If the tabulators are the same, costs can be minimised.
• Costs for political parties campaigning for their candidates in general election  and for or against the referendum proposals will be much less if  votes are cast on the same day.  
• Public (voters) will be spared the trouble of going to vote on referendum separately.
• The constitutional crisis arising from simultaneous existence of a parliament and a constituent assembly can be avoided.
• If the constitution is going to be drafted afresh there will be no role for the elected parliament. A way out may be to elect a constituent   assembly that transforms into a parliament after the constitution is passed.

The last option may not be accepted by some   party. So the number one option where election to parliament and vote on the reform recommendations are held at the same time appears best among  the alternatives. But being best does not guarantee its universal acceptance by all parties. A political impasse is looming large in the horizon. There has to be give and take among the stakeholders before the reformed state sets sail in its new journey.

hasnat.hye5@gmail.com