What is a shadow cabinet, will it take shape in Bangladesh?

The election is over, and preparations are now on to form a new government. There is intense discussion about who might find a place in the cabinet led by Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Chairperson Tarique Rahman. Amid this, news about a shadow cabinet or shadow government has sparked curiosity.

After the results of the 13th parliamentary election held on 12 February were announced, National Citizen Party (NCP) spokesperson Asif Mahmud Shojib Bhuiyan raised the issue of forming a shadow cabinet. Jamaat-e-Islami parliamentary candidate Shishir Monir later said the same.

Jamaat, NCP and nine other parties formed an alliance of 11 parties to contest this election. Their 11-party electoral alliance won 77 seats and is set to take the opposition benches in parliament. Winning more than two-thirds of the seats, BNP is set to form a government after a decade and a half.

After the full results of the vote were published, Asif Mahmud wrote on Facebook on Sunday, “We are preparing to form a shadow cabinet. The shadow cabinet will work as a watchdog to ensure transparency and accountability in overall activities.”

Shishir Monir, who lost on Jamaat ticket, wrote on Facebook, “Bring innovation to politics. Let the ruling party form a cabinet. Let the opposition form a shadow cabinet. Let there be intense debate inside and outside parliament. Only then will creative leadership develop.”

Newly elected members of parliament and members of the new cabinet are scheduled to take oath tomorrow Tuesday. After that, will the opposition form a shadow cabinet? What exactly is a shadow cabinet? How is it formed? Let us look for answers to these questions.

The concept of a shadow cabinet comes from the Westminster parliamentary system of the United Kingdom, where it is known as a “shadow cabinet.” According to this practice, the opposition forms a shadow government. Its job is to monitor government policies, criticise them and offer alternative proposals. The goal is to make parliamentary democracy more transparent and accountable.

According to the definition on the UK Parliament website, “The Shadow Cabinet is the team of senior spokespeople chosen by the Leader of the Opposition to mirror the Cabinet in Government. Each member of the shadow cabinet is appointed to lead on a specific policy area for their party and to question and challenge their counterpart in the Cabinet. In this way the Official Opposition seeks to present itself as an alternative government-in-waiting.”

In other words, just as there are ministers of different departments in a cabinet, members of the opposition are assigned responsibility for corresponding departments in a shadow cabinet. They keep watch over what the minister of that department is doing. Again, there may not be a shadow minister for every minister; it is up to the opposition to decide in which areas they want shadow ministers.

In parliamentary democracy, keeping the ruling party accountable is considered important. The main responsibility of a democratic government is to ensure the rights of the people. Parliament is the institution that oversees whether this responsibility is properly fulfilled. And in parliamentary systems, a shadow cabinet is an important tool to ensure accountability.

Australia and Canada can be cited as examples. In these countries, shadow cabinet activities are quite visible. In Australia, the opposition’s shadow cabinet closely follows the activities of government ministers. Often, when the opposition wins an election and forms a government, shadow ministers receive important cabinet responsibilities.

The UK example is especially apt. From 2020 to 2024, the opposition party was the Labour Party. During that time, party leader Keir Starmer formed a shadow cabinet. When Labour won the 2024 election and formed the government, many members of the shadow cabinet were made ministers in the new government.

The job of shadow ministers is not only to criticise the government, but also to maintain communication with stakeholders in relevant sectors. These stakeholders include employers, workers, suppliers and consumers.

By maintaining communication, shadow ministers learn about the real problems in their sectors and can pressure the government to take effective measures. For example, in a country, a shadow minister for education raised allegations of waste and mismanagement in a school infrastructure development program. As a result, an investigation began and the government became more cautious in implementing such programs in the future.

In the United Kingdom, the shadow cabinet regularly monitors government activities and ensures accountability by questioning ministers in parliament. Similarly, in Australia, the shadow cabinet deeply reviews government decisions.

In a shadow cabinet, it is clearly determined which opposition member will oversee which subject or ministry. Opposition leaders can challenge the government with evidence-based arguments about the problems and realities of these sectors. At the same time, it becomes easier for journalists, researchers and analysts to find an appropriate opposition spokesperson on a particular issue.

Overall, a shadow cabinet strengthens accountability in democracy. Instead of making superficial accusations, it creates an environment for presenting alternative policies and constructive debate. This can also increase the participation of skilled and talented people in politics.

In the context of Bangladesh, discussion about a shadow cabinet is quite new. There has never been a formal shadow cabinet formed in Bangladesh before. Political analysts think that if it happens, democracy could become stronger.

In the past, opposition parties in Bangladesh have often boycotted parliament. As a result, debates that should have taken place in parliament instead moved to the streets, where strikes and blockades often led to violence and made the country unstable.

Experts believe that if a shadow cabinet is formed, the opposition could play a more effective role from within parliament and take a constructive and institutional role in such situations.

Badiul Alam Majumdar, secretary of Citizens for Good Governance (Shujan), told Prothom Alo, “To my knowledge, this has never happened in Bangladesh. I think it would be a good initiative.”

Badiul Alam Majumdar said that currently the opposition criticises the government on various issues in parliament and often raises allegations. However, these criticisms often do not take the form of specific, objective and structured policy discussions. There needs to be an institutional channel to present constructive opinions by using the skills and experience of experts on important state issues, so that positive and productive debate becomes possible.

Referring to examples of crises arising from political differences, Badiul Alam said that often when differences arise between the government and the opposition on an issue, instead of parliamentary discussion; it turns into street protests, strikes or conflicts. As a result, policy disagreements do not get resolved at the discussion table but create political deadlock.

He believes that strengthening formal and structured ways to present review and resolve differences could allow many problems to be solved peacefully and effectively. In his view, this would also make political culture more constructive.