Can political parties reach an agreement through discussion, what history says?

Differences have recently emerged among political parties regarding the implementation of the July Charter or reform proposals. In light of this, the interim government has urged the parties to engage in discussion among themselves to provide a unified set of recommendations to the government.

The government, however, will not organise this discussion, the initiative must come from the political parties themselves. If the parties fail to reach a collective decision within a week, the government will proceed with its own course of action.

This request was formally made by the interim government on Monday. Three days have since passed, yet there has been no indication of any discussion among the political parties, not even informal contact.

Considering the limited time and political realities, analysts remain sceptical that the parties will voluntarily come together for dialogue.

Following the fall of military ruler H. M. Ershad in the 1990s, Bangladesh experienced several political crises centering on national elections. To resolve such crises, dialogues were occasionally initiated either independently by local actors or with the involvement of influential foreign countries and the United Nations.

However, none of these dialogues led to a lasting resolution; rather, in most cases, the country drifted towards greater political confrontation.

The government of Sheikh Hasina was ousted on 5 August last year following a student-led uprising. On 8 August, an interim government headed by professor Muhammad Yunus assumed office.

Inspired by the aspirations of that uprising, political parties, the government and civil society expressed a collective desire for state reform. Subsequently, the government established 11 commissions tasked with proposing reforms to the constitution, electoral system and other state structures.

To implement the recommendations of these commissions, the National Consensus Commission was formed on 12 February this year under the leadership of the Chief Adviser. Professor Ali Riaz, chair of the Constitutional Reform Commission, was appointed as the Commission’s vice-chairman.

After nearly eight and a half months of continuous consultations with 30 political parties, the Consensus Commission drafted the July Charter. The majority of parties signed the document.

However, they could not agree on the mechanisms for implementing the proposed reforms. Analysts note that, if a consensus could not be achieved over the past eight and a half months with government facilitation, it is unrealistic to expect the parties to do so independently within one week. Past failed dialogues reinforce this scepticism.

According to the commission’s recommendations, the implementation of the July Charter comprises three stages: the issuance of executive orders, a national referendum and empowering the next parliament to act as a Constitutional Reform Council alongside its regular duties.

Disagreements among political parties, particularly the BNP, Jamaat-e-Islami and the National Citizen Party (NCP), persist over these stages. The primary contention centres on the timing of the referendum and whether dissenting views will be incorporated into the reform proposals.

Political dialogue in Bangladesh has become a recurring phenomenon, whenever a crisis emerges, parties convene for talks; yet when consensus proves elusive, those dialogues fade into history without resolution.

From the late 1980s under military rule to the current efforts in 2025, Bangladesh has witnessed numerous dialogues, but the question remains: how many have actually succeeded in resolving conflicts?

Following the 1988 elections, nearly all political parties united in demanding the resignation of military ruler H. M. Ershad and the transfer of power. Three major alliances were formed: the eight-party alliance led by the Awami League, the seven-party alliance led by the BNP and a five-party leftist coalition. Jamaat-e-Islami also agitated for Ershad’s removal but remained outside these alliances.

As the anti-Ershad movement intensified, the three alliances simultaneously issued a Joint Framework on 19 November 1990, outlining their demand for elections under a neutral, non-partisan caretaker government to establish a sovereign parliament. Merely two weeks later, Ershad appointed justice Shahabuddin Ahmed as vice president and transferred power to him before stepping down.

The fall of the Ershad regime thus marked the first instance of an effective political dialogue during a mass movement. Under justice Shahabuddin Ahmed’s interim administration, the BNP, Awami League, leftist and Islamic parties participated in multiple meetings to determine the framework of the transitional government.

In accordance with that framework, a parliamentary election was held on 27 February 1991 under the non-partisan caretaker government. The BNP secured a majority and formed the government. However, it did not incorporate the caretaker government system into the constitution. Consequently, the opposition once again took to the streets demanding its inclusion.

Although the three-alliance framework was widely discussed, it was never formally signed by the parties and therefore did not attain the status of a National Charter.

When the Awami League and other opposition parties launched a movement demanding a caretaker government, a dialogue was held in the Jatiya Sangsad (National Parliament) on 31 August 1994 between the then BNP leader, the late A Q M Badruddoza Chowdhury and the late Awami League leader, Abdus Samad Azad. The talks, however, yielded no results.

At that time, Commonwealth secretary-general Emeka Anyaoku visited Dhaka and met with BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia and Awami League President Sheikh Hasina.

He later sent his special envoy, Sir Ninian Stephen, an international expert in mediating political dialogues. Despite holding several rounds of meetings with both sides, he too failed to achieve any breakthrough in Bangladesh.

The 15 February 1996 election was subsequently held amid a boycott by the Awami League and other major opposition parties. The BNP returned to power but was forced to step down within a month under intense street protests. The caretaker government system was reinstated and another election in June brought the Awami League to office.

In the face of mass protests, the caretaker government system was incorporated into the Constitution in 1996. Under this neutral caretaker administration, two consecutive general elections were held — in 1996 and 2001. However, a deadlock emerged over the caretaker system during the 2006 national election. The 14-party alliance led by the Awami League refused to accept Justice KM Hasan as the head of the caretaker government and launched continuous movements.

In October 2006, amid the political unrest, BNP’s then–Secretary General Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan and Awami League’s then–General Secretary Abdul Jalil held dialogue sessions in the National Parliament building. The two leaders met six times over a span of two weeks. In these talks, the Awami League presented an 11-point proposal, the main demands of which were the formation of a neutral advisory council and the reconstitution of the controversial Election Commission. However, both sides remained firm in their positions. The dialogue collapsed amid protests, blockades, and violent clashes.

When the talks failed, and the stalemate deepened, a state of emergency was declared on 11 January 2007. A military-backed caretaker government assumed power. Both of the country’s main leaders, Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia, were imprisoned.

Before the 2008 general election, the two leaders were released, though the political crisis had not yet fully subsided. Former US President and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Jimmy Carter arrived in Dhaka to mediate political dialogue. His organisation, The Carter Centre, in coordination with the United Nations and the Commonwealth, was working to help create an environment conducive to an inclusive election in Bangladesh. Carter held separate meetings with Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia.

The national election was held in December 2008, in which the Awami League–led alliance came to power.

The same Awami League that had twice waged movements demanding a neutral caretaker government abolished the system on 30 June 2011, after coming to power. The BNP and most other opposition parties declared that they would not take part in any election without a caretaker government.

In this situation, ahead of the national election, the United Nations Secretary-General’s special envoy, Oscar Fernandez-Taranco, arrived in Dhaka in late 2013. During his six-day stay, he held dialogues on 10 and 11 December with Syed Ashraful Islam, the then–General Secretary of the Awami League, and Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, the Secretary General of the BNP. A third round of talks took place in the presence of Neal Walker, the UN’s Resident Representative. None of these dialogues succeeded.

Following this, the BNP, Jamaat-e-Islami, and other opposition parties boycotted the election and launched strikes and blockades. Acts of arson and violence broke out across the country.

Amid this turmoil, the 5 January 2014 election was held under the administration of the then–Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. In that election, 153 members of parliament were elected uncontested, while voting took place in 147 constituencies amid widespread violence.

Dialogue fails again before the 'midnight election'

After the 2014 polls, preparations were made to hold the 2018 election again under Sheikh Hasina’s government. The BNP, Jamaat, and other opposition parties opposed this plan.

During this period, a new political polarisation emerged within the opposition camp. The Jatiya Oikya Front (National Unity Front) was formed, bringing together the 20-party alliance led by the BNP and several left-leaning groups. The alliance was led by the veteran politician Dr. Kamal Hossain.

On 1 November 2018, a dialogue took place at Ganabhaban, the Prime Minister’s official residence. Dr. Kamal Hossain attended with BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir and several other opposition leaders, while Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina led the ruling 14-party delegation.

The opposition alliance presented a seven-point demand aimed at ensuring free, fair, and neutral elections. Their demands included: The government’s resignation, dissolution of parliament, formation of a neutral government through dialogue, release of all political prisoners including Khaleda Zia, and withdrawal of false cases.

Ultimately, relying on assurances of a fair election, the National Unity Front decided to participate. A smaller-scale dialogue between the two alliances was also held before the polls.

The 2018 election, however, came to be widely known as the 'midnight election', as allegations spread that voting took place the night before polling day. The Awami League–led alliance won 293 seats, while the BNP and other opposition parties were effectively prevented from contesting on the ground.

In addition to these, dialogues on the appointment of the Election Commission were also held twice earlier — in 2012, under President Zillur Rahman, and in 2016, under President Abdul Hamid. Another round of talks took place in 2023, before forming a new Election Commission. However, opposition parties, including the BNP, boycotted the discussions, alleging that past dialogues had yielded no results.

From 1990 to 2025, dialogues have taken place in Bangladesh many times, and failures have occurred repeatedly. Yet, in every crisis, dialogue has always returned as the only refuge in politics.

If political parties can reach a genuine consensus this time, perhaps the three decades of this 'history of discussions' could, for once, become a story of success.

Mohiuddin Ahmad, a writer and researcher, told Prothom Alo that in the past, even foreign mediators could not make dialogues successful. This time, he says, if the political parties themselves sit down, there is a chance for a successful discussion—though he considers it unlikely. He added that during the drafting of the July Charter, differences of opinion and dissenting views were evident, as shown by the examples of Notes of Dissent. Despite extensive planning and time investment, consensus on implementation could not be achieved.

Therefore, he observes, it is hard to believe that political parties will come together to find a solution. The question remains: without unity, how effectively can reforms be implemented?