July Charter: Govt considering more than 4 questions in referendum

The interim government is considering including more than four questions in the forthcoming referendum aimed at implementing the constitutional reform proposals contained in the July National Charter.

According to reliable government sources, one question would cover the issues on which most political parties, including the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, are in agreement. Separate questions would address key proposals where major parties—particularly the BNP—hold differing views, such as the formation of an upper house under a proportional representation (PR) system and the caretaker government mechanism.

In total, four to five questions are likely to be included in the referendum.

Priority is being given to holding the referendum on the same day as the Jatiya Sangsad (national parliament) election. The government hopes that if the decision is implemented in this way, the political parties, especially the BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami, will accept it.

Meanwhile, professor Asif Nazrul, law adviser to the interim government, told newspersons in Dhaka on Tuesday that it would become clear within three or four days what steps had been taken to implement the Charter.

The July National Charter, comprising 84 reform proposals drafted by six reform commissions through discussions with 30 political parties, includes 48 proposals relating to the Constitution.

At least 30 of these have been met with differing opinions from one or another political party. The National Consensus Commission’s recommendations on implementing the Charter did not address these dissenting views.

The 48 constitutional reform proposals have been listed in a draft order schedule. The Commission recommended issuing an order to hold a referendum on whether voters approve the July National Charter (constitutional reforms) Implementation Order and the reform proposals listed therein. The decision on the timing of the referendum has been left to the government.

The BNP has strongly reacted to the omission of notes of dissent, and demanded that the referendum be held on the same day as the national election. Jamaat-e-Islami, on the other hand, has responded positively to the recommendations but insists that the referendum should precede the election.

Against this backdrop, the government is considering introducing certain changes to the Commission’s recommendations.

According to related sources, most of the political parties, including the BNP, Jamaat-e-Islami, and the National Citizen Party (NCP), reached a consensus on 30 out of 48 constitutional reform proposals. These will likely be combined into a single “package question,” asking voters whether they support the implementation of these 30 agreed proposals.

The remaining 18 proposals are said to involve major differences of opinion, most of them fundamental in nature. Separate three or four questions may be framed to address these points of contention.

Sources indicate that one of the major areas of disagreement is the formation of an upper house under a proportional representation (PR) system. A separate question would therefore ask whether voters support establishing the upper chamber under the PR system. Another question may ask whether the caretaker government mechanism should be implemented as proposed by the National Consensus Commission.

A separate question could be incorporated regarding the appointments to the offices of Ombudsman, Public Service Commission, Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), and the Anti-Corruption Commission.

A question may be included on whether they want the appointment process of these institutions to be incorporated into the Constitution.

One source added that efforts would be made to accommodate all 18 disputed proposals within three or four questions. If this proves impracticable, certain issues might be excluded.

Following the National Consensus Commission’s recommendations, the July National Charter (Constitutional Reform) Implementation Order would first be promulgated. The referendum would then be held on that order and the 48 reform proposals. If the “Yes” vote prevails, the next parliament would act as a Constitutional Reform Council to amend the Constitution within 270 days. Alternatively, if Parliament fails to do so within that time frame, the proposals would automatically be incorporated into the Constitution.

Professor Asif Nazrul, adviser on law, justice and parliamentary affairs, has said that the situation regarding the implementation of the July Charter will become clear within the next three or four days.

“We had expected that political parties would hold discussions among themselves and give us a unified directive. But we did not just sit and wait for that. We have been working on our own. Within three or four days, you will clearly know what steps we have taken regarding implementation of the Charter,” he told newspersons after attending a meeting on amendments to the Legal Aid Ordinance at the Judicial Administration Training Institute in Dhaka on Tuesday afternoon.

In response to a question, professor Asif Nazrul said, “We are discussing this at different levels of the advisory council. We are about to take the steps necessary for the country and its people, taking into account the expectations of all parties.”

Earlier, presiding over the meeting, the law adviser said that the Consensus Commission had been unfairly criticised.

“It has been alleged that the Commission carried out so many discussions yet brought about no reforms—that it was a waste of effort. The level of disinformation has reached such an extent that Tk 2.5 million (25 lakh), spent on food, was publicised as Tk 830 million (83 crore). There should be a limit to everything,” he said.

The adviser also noted that bureaucratic opposition had hampered implementation of certain reforms.

Recalling the experience of drafting the Police Reform Commission Act, he said, “The law was supposed to be initiated by the home ministry, but the law ministry took the initiative and prepared the draft. The act contained a key proposal that the Commission would recommend three names for the post of Inspector General of Police, from which the government would appoint one. When the draft went to the inter-ministerial committee, the bureaucracy strongly opposed it.”