For all latest news, follow the Daily Sun's Google News channel.
Following the Supreme Court Appellate Division’s decision to uphold the High Court verdict in the case concerning the 15th Constitutional Amendment, top politicians of different political parties in the country, including left-leaning parties, and eminent personalities have welcomed the restoration of provisions for elections under a non-party caretaker government and referendum.
They also said that fascism and autocracy were established during the regime of the Awami League, whose activities are currently banned, through scrapping the provision of the caretaker government system from the constitution.
However, both the politicians and the eminent personalities stressed that parliament must determine the structure, powers and operational framework of the caretaker government through appropriate legislation.
In separate interviews with the Daily Sun, leaders of the Bangladesh Samajtantrik Dal (Basad), Communist Party of Bangladesh (CPB), Workers Party, Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal (Jasod), eminent lawyer Shahdeen Malik, and political analyst Prof Mahbub Ullah shared their reactions.
Basad General Secretary Bazlur Rashid Firoz said that Bangladesh’s political experience has repeatedly demonstrated that free and fair elections are not possible under a partisan government.
He noted that the caretaker government system was introduced in 1996 following years of public movements. The court's decision to restore it is a reflection of the people's aspirations.
He also welcomed the reinstatement of the referendum provision but urged that the four fundamental state principles – democracy, socialism, secularism and nationalism – remain intact.
He further called for retaining the Proclamation of Independence in the schedule of the Constitution.
Political consensus, reforms essential
CPB General Secretary Abdullah Kafi Ratan said that the restoration of the caretaker government and referendum provisions is a positive development. He added that any major constitutional change should be based on broad political consensus.
In his view, a two-thirds majority in the parliament alone should not be sufficient to make unilateral constitutional decisions.
He said that constitutional amendments affecting the state’s fundamental structure should be subject to public opinion through referendums.
He also stressed the need for dialogue with both parliamentary and extra-parliamentary political parties to build a national consensus, adding that this was one of the reasons why four left-wing parties did not sign the proposals of the National Consensus Commission.
Bangladesh Workers’ Party General Secretary Nur Ahmed Bakul said the caretaker government concept emerged from the 1990 mass uprising, but major political parties later weakened its moral foundation by pursuing their own political interests.
Therefore, he argued, even if the caretaker government system returns, it cannot be considered a permanent solution.
He said, “One election may become acceptable, but without comprehensive electoral reforms, the crisis cannot be permanently resolved.”
Regarding the four fundamental state principles and the constitutional recognition of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, he said these issues have long been politically debated. Since no final decision has yet been reached, he believes they should be left for the next parliament to decide.
‘The lesser of two evils’
Jasod’s Office Secretary Sajjad Hossain described the caretaker government system as “the lesser of two evils” under the current political reality, saying Bangladesh has not yet developed an electoral environment where all political parties can trust elections conducted under a partisan government.
He said the country should eventually establish an electoral system that ensures peaceful transfers of power without requiring caretaker governments.
He also emphasised the importance of achieving national consensus on the state’s fundamental constitutional issues.
Prominent lawyer Shahdeen Malik said that although the High Court declared unconstitutional the provisions of the 15th Amendment abolishing the caretaker government, the previous caretaker government framework has not automatically been revived.
According to him, parliament must enact fresh constitutional amendments specifying who will head the caretaker government, how many advisers it will have, and define their tenure and powers.
He said, “The Supreme Court cannot legislate. It can only declare a law unconstitutional. It is parliament’s responsibility to establish the subsequent legal framework.”
Shahdeen Malik further said the court did not issue any ruling regarding the four fundamental state principles, the constitutional recognition of the Father of the Nation, or other constitutional matters. Any changes to these issues would require parliament to pass constitutional amendments, and if the referendum provision becomes operational, referendums may also be necessary where applicable.
Political analyst Prof Mahbub Ullah said that under the current political reality, credible elections are not possible under a partisan government. Therefore, he viewed the return of the caretaker government system as a positive development.
However, he described the constitutional issues left for parliament as a “litmus test” for lawmakers. While discussions with political parties outside parliament would be beneficial, he said the constitutional responsibility for making final decisions rests solely with parliament.
Regarding the constitutional recognition of the Father of the Nation, the four fundamental principles and other constitutional questions, he said these issues have remained subjects of debate for many years. Future decisions, he argued, should ultimately reflect the will of the majority of the people.