At a time when political parties are grappling with rifts among them and a crisis of trust, the July National Charter offers a glimmer of hope for national consensus. With its proposed political reforms, accountability mechanisms, and vision for inclusive development, the July Charter will remain as an effective and potentially transformative document before both the political leadership and the people of Bangladesh.
One of the core objectives of the July Charter is to ensure citizens’ rights by building a humane state free from partisan influence, and to establish a robust institutional framework through the reform of different state organs. Given its significance, the proposal for a referendum to secure a public mandate on the July Charter has emerged as a central point of discussion.
If the July Charter can be legitimised through a referendum, the implementation of its reform proposals by political parties will likely become much smoother. More importantly, such a process would make political parties directly accountable to the people, who could then rightfully claim ownership of the Charter. This, in turn, would enhance public participation in governance and help restore trust in the political parties that has long been missing from Bangladesh’s political culture.
A referendum can serve as an effective means to foster trust and accountability between citizens and political parties. Bangladesh’s past experiences, albeit mixed, with referendums have shown that they can be powerful instruments for gaining public legitimacy when conducted fairly and transparently. Some analysts, however, caution that a referendum might deepen existing political divisions if it is not managed prudently.
For these reasons, the proposal to hold a referendum on the July Charter has sparked extensive debate across political circles. Concerns have been raised over both constitutional and legal constraints as well as the timing and process of such a vote. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and its allies have argued that the referendum should be held on the same day as the national election in February, while Jamaat-e-Islami and the National Citizen Party (NCP) have proposed that it be conducted beforehand. Although the NCP initially supported a pre-election referendum, the practicality of such haste must be carefully examined.
There are several limitations to consider. First, it is crucial to assess whether the public possesses adequate knowledge about the July Charter. If people lack a clear understanding, the justification of the referendum could be undermined, especially if the outcome rejects the Charter out of confusion or indifference. This could marginalise the Charter’s core principles.
Second, there is insufficient time to hold a referendum before the national election. At the same time, delaying the election to accommodate the referendum would likely plunge the country into further uncertainty. Third, if a referendum were held without sufficient public awareness or mobilisation, voter turnout could be worryingly low, similar to Italy’s June referendum on labour and citizenship reforms earlier this year, which faced questions about its legitimacy due to poor participation.
Taking all the points into consideration, holding the referendum alongside the national election would therefore be the most practical solution. It would save both time and resources, and it would benefit from the heightened political enthusiasm and high voter turnout that national polls typically generate. This would also allow for some degree of psychological preparation among voters in the months leading up to the parliamentary election in February, increasing the likelihood of a more informed and meaningful verdict.
Reform policy like the July Charter is often perceived as complex by ordinary citizens. While the July Charter has sparked considerable debate among the political parties at the national level, public understanding of its contents remains questionable. Hence, it is essential to educate and prepare the electorate before any referendum. Rushing into it would be unwise. If the referendum coincides with the national election, there will be at least a brief window to foster public discussion and awareness, a prerequisite for legitimacy. That is why people have to be made aware of this before organising the referendum otherwise there could be questions about legitimacy of the referendum in the future.
Typically, referendums present voters with a simple ’Yes’ or ‘No’ choice, though some countries have offered multiple options to capture nuanced opinions. However, the essential principle of referendum is clarity: the process must be straightforward and comprehensible to all sections of society. Given the current level of civic awareness in Bangladesh, it would be best to frame the referendum simply—to ask whether citizens endorse the implementation of the July Charter’s agreed principles.
However, a challenge remains: how should issues on which political parties have yet to reach consensus be addressed? Expecting the referendum to settle such complexities would be unrealistic in Bangladesh’s context.
Therefore, it would be more prudent to leave the detailed implementation framework of the July Charter to the next elected parliament. It would be more pragmatic if the new government, through broad-based parliamentary debate and cross-party consensus, outlines a participatory roadmap for realising the Charter’s objectives. Such a process would not only enhance public acceptance but also help prevent future political polarisation and divisions.
* Bulbul Siddiqi is a professor at the Department of Political Science and Sociology at North South University