Prothom Alo :
What is the constitution reform commission doing now? Let’s start with your experience over the past two and a half months.
We are specifically working on writing the recommendations. We have arrived at this point through a lengthy process. In this process we have given most importance to the views and opinions of the stakeholders. We have considered the citizens to be the largest and most important stakeholders. With this in mind we called for opinions to be given by means of a website. We received about 50,000 opinions. But the weak side of having such opinions through this website is that these are not very scientific. After all, questions remain about who are giving these opinions, where from, if anyone is many multiple submissions, or if their identity is genuine and so on. Despite all these weaknesses, we have managed to get an idea of what the citizens want.
We have invited small groups of individuals and representatives of various institutions and citizens. A total of 43 institutions have sent their representatives. We have talked to them. We have spoken with 27 persons from the civil society. We have discussed with 10 young thinkers and 7 constitutional experts. We also called for written opinions from 25 political parties and three alliances. They have submitted their views. Outside of that too certain political parties have given their opinions.
Prothom Alo :
Given the progress of the work, do you think you will manage to submit your report to the interim government within the 7 January deadline?
We hope to be able to submit our report by 7 January, even if in a draft form. We have two responsibilities. The first is to review the constitution. We have taken this very seriously. If we want to understand what we want to do, we must first identify the flaws and strengths in the present constitution. As part of this task, we have perused the constitutions of 121 countries including Bangladesh.
The constitution is a political document. There is a historical background to this constitution drawn up in 1972. We have tried to analyse this background. We are not just taking 1972 into consideration. The people of this land where the 1972 constitution was created have a long struggle behind them. This is not just from 1947. There is a long background of anti-colonial struggle behind this. We gave important to this in our review of the constitution. We have looked into the process of the constitution being composed and the political criticism of the time.
We have reviewed the amendments made to the constitution from 1972 to 2024 and have also reviewed the fundamental pillars. We have given must important to the review phase of our work because we feel we must understand the context. This is very important for the second part of our task, that is, drawing up the recommendations.
The people may be the main stakeholders, but the political parties are an influencing force in this regard. What do you feel about the proposals of the political parties?
Our feeling is that the political parties have given utmost importance to the overall situation. I can unhesitatingly say that perhaps of all the written proposals that we have received from them, most have been given after serious considerations. They have given proposals in view of each and every article. W did not feel that these proposals were made on the spur of the moment. We felt these proposals were an expression of the interest and sincerity of the political parties and also clearly indicate their stand on the question of the constitution. This is a very positive matter. They have given much thought and consideration to their proposals. These written proposals will remain as documents. We have kept on record many of the opinions of individuals, organisations, young intellectuals, the website opinions as well as other recommendations and views.
In addition to all that, we have run a survey in which a total 46,000 respondents took part. We will make all this public at one point of time so that people will understand what we have been doing. The expectations regarding the constitution that has been generated among the people after the 2024 mass uprising needs to be documented.
Prothom Alo :
How realistic are you the proposals of the political parties, do you feel? How far did they give consideration to the existing realities of Bangladesh?
We feel they have been able to take that into consideration. Every political party has an ideology, a political objective. It is only natural that this will guide them, drive them. This is what they will want to achieve. They exist in the reality of today. But when we talk about change, when we talk about dreams, when we talk about aspirations, today’s reality cannot be taken into consideration alone. Speaking to the stakeholders, I felt that people have a dream. Many of us say the proposals should be implemented, but unless there is a dream, how can there be change? Chances for a change do not come about every day.
Prothom Alo :
What will your role be once the reform commission recommendations are handed in to the interim government?
Given the terms of reference of the commission, our task will be over after we hand over our recommendations to the interim government. Then it will be determined through a political process how far and when these will be implemented. The way I see it is there are two angles to this process. One is, ‘what’ and the other is ‘how’. We are in charge of ‘what’. ‘How’ is the responsibility of the interim government. If there is need for our commission to play a role there, we will. The members of the commission consider this an opportunity to play a historic role. I am amazed at their sincerity.
You have gained certain experience working in this commission. You are a political scientist too. Will you speak to the government about what process will be suitable next for Bangladesh?
I will not say this as head of the commission. As you are taking my professional standing into consideration, I would say that this is a political process. Through this political process a consensus among the political parties must be formed. And that must be done though discussion and dialogue. Incidentally, by means of the discussions with the stake holders and the proposals from the political parties, we saw that there was a greater space of consensus among the people of Bangladesh. Yet we magnify the difference of opinions. There will naturally be differences in a democratic society.
We have a pluralistic society. For long this society enjoys to debate. We are used to debate. But I see a far larger space of consensus among us. So before we begin the next process, we need to determine these areas of consensus. A list can be drawn up of these areas and the government can hold talks with the political parties, together or separately. If importance is placed on the areas of consensus, it will not be difficult to establish a consensus. I am not saying this will happen overnight or just through one sitting, but I am hopeful.
A document can be drawn up once the consensus is formed. The election can be held on that basis. A referendum can ever be held to get the people’s mandate on the consensus. The process can be decided upon through discussion. At the end of the day, it is the politicians who are to run the country. There has been such a massive movement, so many people have died. This did not happen in just a day, not even in just 36 days. The people achieved this through a 15 to 16 year struggle against the autocratic authoritarian rule. The next task is for the politicians.
Prothom Alo :
Is there any possibility of you playing a role in the negotiations in the discussions and negotiations with the political parties?
Everyone wants to have a role to play in this historical moment. In that sense we will certainly have a role to play. We will certainly offer explanations and analyses if needed during the discussions with the political parties. I am sure it is not just our commission but all the other commissions to, who are prepared for this. So the commissions will have an unwritten role during the talks with the political parties.
In the meantime Muhammad Yunus has announced a consensus commission comprising the heads of the six commissions. I see no difference between the aims and objectives of the interim government and the political parties. The main task here is to find a path. In other talks it has been seen that there is rivalry between the two sides. There will be no rivalry here. So the task of finding a path will be easy.
You will give a report, make recommendations, but how will the constitution be written? Will the constitution of 1972 be revoked, or will it be amended, or rewritten? You had spoken of rewriting.
Ali Riaz: Bangladesh’s constitution has already been rewritten twice. Is the constitution created in 1975 by means of the fourth amendment the same constitution as the 1972 one? This was done in parliament with no mandate (Awami League did not take the mandate for the amendment of the constitution in the 1973 election). The constitution was rewritten for the second time by means of the fifth amendment. For those who get anxious about the word ‘rewriting’, I humbly request them to carefully go through the history of Bangladesh’s constitution. Rewriting the constitution is nothing alarming. The reason is that the constitution is no divine message. The constitution is the reflection of people’s political aspirations. It is a guide to running the state.
We do not expect all of our recommendations to be accepted. Many of these will be accepted by means if talks and discussions, many will be dropped. A draft will have to be drawn up as to how these will be added to the constitution. This will be done by the elected representatives. Or the political parties can get together and do this before the election. They will rewrite the constitution where required.
Already a consensus has been formed on certain issues. For example, power cannot be unicentric. The matter of brining about a balance to the prime minister’s powers must be added to the constitution. There may be different interpretations balance. So the constitution must be changed in some place of the other, it must be written anew in some places or the other. Whether you call this amendment or rewriting, it makes no difference. The bottom line is whether the constitution reflects the people’s aspirations or not.
Prothom Alo :
Will the work on preparing this draft happen before the election or afterwards? People are curious, and confused, about this.
Ali Riaz: I see the matter this way. When a political consensus is reached, a way will emerge. For example, one way can be a constitution meeting. If the political parties can reach a consensus on this, then a constitution meeting can be held. Then again, if the political parties so want, they can draw up a charter in this regard and later, on the basis of recommendations of the next parliament, they can rewrite or change the constitution. Whether this is done before or after the election, there must be a referendum. I am personally in favour of referendums. Thus requires the mandate of the people. A nation is dreaming of change and so permission must certainly be taken from them.
What guarantee is there that the political party that takes over after the election, will make changes in the constitution in keeping with the recommendations? If there is chaos in this regard, how can this be dealt with?
I don’t want to use the word ‘chaos’ here, I can say ‘uncertainty’. Politics is a matter of uncertainty. There are two solutions here. One is, reforms of the constitution, reforms of the electoral system, reforms of the judiciary, reforms of the public administration. If the political parties reach a consensus on this and if they draw up a charter, that will be an agreement between the nation and the political parties. If the political parties do not behave in keeping with the massive aspirations generated by the sacrifice of so many lives, then they will need a space for accountability. The second is, we get scared due to past failures. It is okay to be scared, but I do not think the space for fear is major here.
An unimaginable event has just taken place before the nation. It is the people of Bangladesh who have made the impossible possible. This is not the first time we gave done so. This 2024 uprising is a recent event. We have done this in 1971, in 1990. We are the ones to come up with the caretaker system, something which didn’t exist anywhere before. It is our reality that led us to come up with a way out.
We criticise the politicians, but they have done a lot. We must give them that recognition. I see uncertainty, but at the same time I want to remain hopeful for a number of reasons. The first is, this is Bangladesh of 2024, not of 1990. The second is, our politicians have proven they can do it in the past.
Prothom Alo :
There were students in the movement. Among the political forces, there was the centrist, the left, everyone. A general consensus had grown among them about removing Sheikh Hasina. After the uprising we saw a divide emerging. Everyone has their specific thoughts, their political agenda. How optimistic can we be about a national consensus on the fundamental issues?
It is true that there are divisions among our political parties, our civil society, among the students, but we want to see where there are areas of consensus. An area of consensus is that they do not want to see the power centered at one point, they want an election system where citizens’ rights will be upheld, they want a state of human rights where there will be no enforced disappearances, no extrajudicial killing. We can begin with this area of consensus. When I speak of national consensus, I am certainly not talking about North Korea.
The biggest lesson I have learnt from joining the constitution reform commission is that the aspirations of the people in this country regarding governance are very clear and simple. These are not huge aspirations. It is not as if they want to turn the state upside down. These simple aspirations are the aspirations of the politicians and the general people alike. The area of consensus regarding governance is extremely important.
You are repeating the matter of consensus again and again. Did you find any specific area of consensus in the proposals of the stakeholders? Can you elaborate on that?
I want to see the area of consensus from the consideration of what people want. People want a system where people’s rights will be protected. How is this being expressed? They are saying, render the judiciary independent. Why are they saying so? They are saying this because, where will they go if they fall into trouble? If the judiciary does not listen to them, to whom will they go? They say, stop the centralisation of power. It us because no one listens to them is power is centralised. That means they want accountability.
In asking for accountability, they are saying, reform the local government too so that their representatives are not run by the executive. We want to see everything on a large scale, but look at the small aspirations of the common people in their lives. We say this in lofty terms, let the judiciary be independent. But the people want one thing, and that is justice. For example, they are talking about decentralization of the judiciary. It is not that they want to see a building of the judiciary. They see they are rendered penniless running to and from Dhaka for justice. They want a way out from this. They are talking about a caretaker system for the election. Why are they wanting this? It is because they want to be able to vote.
Prothom Alo :
Our constitution is very hard to understand, creating a distance from the general people. They view the constitution as some complex matter. They are, in many case, not aware what rights the constitution has given them. Will you recommend the constitution to be written in a manner which the people can comprehend?
Yes, we will put forward specific recommendations for the language of the constitution to be easily understandable. Most stakeholders told us to make the constitution smaller and easier. They say that they want to understand their rights so they will know if their rights are being violated and where to go. They will be able to understand from the constitution where to go in the case of different rights violations, whether to the human rights commission, the judiciary, the parliamentary committee or anywhere else. These must certainly be laid down in the constitution. They want a document that protects them.
One criticism aimed at the constitution reform commission is that there are no representatives of various religions, ethnicities and other minorities in the commission. What answer do you have to this? Did you invite them to the commission?
Firstly, the commission does not have the religious and ethnic diversity that should have been. This is a weakness. There is no way we can deny this. But is it not that our commission did not consider ethnic, religious and other minorities to be stakeholders. We felt that we must ensure that we hear their voices. After all, Bangladesh is theirs too. We called representatives of the Dalit community too to hear their voice. The plurality of which we speak is not merely in words. We have tried to listen to everyone as far as possible.
Prothom Alo :
Thank you
Thank you too.
* This interview, originally published in the print and online editions of Prothom Alo, has been rewritten in English by Ayesha Kabir