State and politics: A ‘BNP narrative’ from an Awami president in parliament

Under Article 73(2) of the Constitution of Bangladesh, it is customary for the President to deliver an address at the first sitting of Parliament each year and at the first session following a general election. However, the President does not deliver this speech according to his own judgement or discretion. Instead, he is required to read a text prepared by the ruling party. This practice has long been followed, and no serious effort has been made to change it. That is why, in the past, we have heard Awami League’s rhetoric from the mouth of a president nominated by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). This time, we have heard a BNP narrative from the mouth of a president appointed by the government of the Bangladesh Awami League.

The customary formalities that mark the opening day of Parliament were also observed this time. A new Speaker and Deputy Speaker were elected. Subsequently, on the basis of discussions and consensus between the two sides, seven committees, including the Business Advisory Committee and a special committee, were formed. Until ministry-based standing committees are constituted, these bodies will play a key role in guiding parliamentary proceedings.

As is customary, condolence motions were presented in memory of former public representatives and distinguished individuals who passed away between the previous and the current parliaments. These motions included the names of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia and those martyred in the July uprising, as well as individuals convicted of war crimes during the Awami League era. No objections were raised over these inclusions. Indeed, the Speaker, himself a freedom fighter, simply announced, without further debate, that all the names had been incorporated.

The opposition parties, Jamaat-e-Islami and the National Citizen Party (NCP), had earlier stated that they did not wish to hear the President’s address and instead intended to pursue impeachment proceedings against him. The difficulty, however, is that without the support of the ruling BNP such a motion could not be passed in Parliament—a fact they themselves are aware of. Consequently, when the President began his address, they protested collectively with placards and staged a walkout.

There have been precedents in the past for boycotting the President’s address in Parliament. Yet the moment the national anthem was played saw a section of opposition MPs remain seated in their places, which offended many observers. They later claimed that due to a technical problem they had not heard the anthem being played. They said they subsequently stood to show respect.

President Mohammed Shahabuddin, widely regarded as an Awami League nominee, delivered an address in Parliament that had been approved by the Cabinet Division of the BNP-led government. It was therefore natural that the speech would contain lavish praise for the BNP government and strong criticism of the Awami League. The President described the Awami League as a fascist party and characterised its rule as a champion of corruption. Yet he did not mention that Bangladesh had been labelled a “champion of corruption” four times during BNP rule.

In his speech, the President respectfully recalled Ziaur Rahman as the proclaimer of independence but did not mention Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman or any other leader by name. Instead, he referred collectively to “all leaders” who contributed to the Liberation War. Notably, this same President, in his opening address to the 12th Parliament on 30 January 2024, had described the BNP and its allies as forces acting against the country. On that occasion, he had termed the 12th parliamentary election free and fair and had urged the nation to remain vigilant against conspiracies and rumours.

The office of the President symbolises the highest dignity and honour of the state. Those who occupy it should uphold that dignity. Yet in Bangladesh, the presidency has repeatedly been rendered “subservient” under successive governments. If we truly regard Parliament as an institution representing all citizens regardless of party affiliation, then the undemocratic practice of making the President read a speech written by the ruling party should be abandoned.

Apart from Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed, no President has seriously attempted to preserve the independence and dignity of the office. Even he, while reading the government-prepared speech in Parliament, would add his own remarks.

The July Charter spoke of balancing the powers of the President and the Prime Minister. Yet those who boycotted the President’s address at the first session of Parliament did not question the government-authored speech itself. Instead, they questioned the President, whom they regard as an ally of authoritarianism. If, in the future, a President affiliated with the BNP assumes office, he will be made to do the same.

Beyond the President’s address, there remain fundamental disagreements between the government and the opposition on several issues, and the first parliamentary session offered no indication of how these disputes might be resolved. There are wide differences between the two sides over the implementation of the July Charter. The ruling party argues that it signed the charter with “notes of dissent” and that the electorate endorsed its election manifesto. That means, it cannot accept provisions beyond that framework. The opposition, however, insists that the entire constitutional order derived from the July Charter must be implemented. They argued that the public endorsed it in full through a referendum.

Mohammed Shahabuddin is Bangladesh’s 22nd President. With a few exceptions, most of his predecessors have failed to project a distinctive personality or independent image. Notable exceptions include Justice Abu Sayeed Chowdhury, Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed, and Professor Badruddoza Chowdhury, who did not simply act as instruments of the ruling party.

Bangladesh’s second President, Abu Sayeed Chowdhury, was elected on 12 January 1972 for a five-year term but resigned after just two years due to tensions with the government. Badruddoza Chowdhury also had to step down within months in 2002 following conflict with the ruling party; impeachment proceedings had even been initiated against him.

Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed served as President twice—first as acting President after the fall of military rule in 1990, and later as elected President during the Awami League government. On neither occasion was his departure from office particularly dignified. There are few examples of political parties in Bangladesh honouring respected individuals with the respect they deserve. Although Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed completed his second term in office, he incurred the deep displeasure of the Awami League over the 2001 general election.

Incumbent President Mohammed Shahabuddin has appeared in two very different roles under two different governments. Comparing his address to Parliament on 30 January 2024 with his speech on 12 March this year reveals the deeper malaise in our democracy and politics. In his earlier address, he described the 7 January election as a historic victory for the people and for democracy.

Yet in his speech at the opening session of the 13th Parliament, he welcomed the mass uprising against the Sheikh Hasina government, stating, “I gratefully remember the ordinary citizens and members of political parties who suffered enforced disappearances, killings, extrajudicial executions, and repression during the one-and-a-half decades of fascist rule, and who endured persecution in the anti-fascist movement. Through their immense sacrifices, Bangladesh has been freed from fascism and has begun its journey towards democracy.”

We have heard the saying that sometimes a single journey could yield two different outcomes. This time we have witnessed two different narratives from the same individual occupying the office of President.

* Sohrab Hassan is a journalist and poet.

* The views expressed are the author’s own.