Bangladesh’s political parties have signed a “July National Charter” that spells out a set of political reform commitments but carries no binding legal force—leaving implementation to the next parliament, according to organizers.
The charter was endorsed on Friday (October 17) after months of debate over post-uprising reforms, one year and two months on from the July upheaval that drove a national conversation about “reform.”
Most anti-fascist opposition groups—excluding the Awami League and its allies—signed the document despite last-minute uncertainty amid pressure from July movement activists.
The notable absence of the National Citizen Party (NCP) dominated the day’s political chatter; the party said it would not sign without a clear legal foundation for the charter.
Signatories framed the text as a political instrument, not a law. While parties pledged to advance its provisions, the document’s execution would ultimately rest with the next Jatiya Sangsad.
Under the Constitution, lawmaking and constitutional amendments are the prerogative of parliament; ordinances issued in the interim lapse if not approved in the first parliamentary session, reinforcing that the charter itself does not impose a legal obligation on a future legislature.
The charter gathers seven headline commitments. Among them: implementing the “July National Charter 2025” as a new political compact; incorporating the charter into the Constitution as a schedule or by suitable means; refraining from litigating the charter and ensuring legal and constitutional safeguards at each step; recognising, at the constitutional and state level, 16 years of anti-fascist struggle and the significance of the 2024 mass uprising; ensuring trials for killings and abuses over the past 16 years and during the July events, conferring state honours on those killed, and providing support, treatment and rehabilitation for the injured.
The parties also pledged comprehensive reforms—constitutional, electoral, judicial, administrative, policing and anti-corruption—through amendments, revisions and, where necessary, new laws and rules; and they committed the interim authorities to carry out consensus measures promptly.
Several dynamics could complicate the road ahead. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) has lodged “notes of dissent” on parts of the text, leaving open how it would approach those clauses if it wins office.
Proponents of a referendum to bind the next parliament—including backers of Jamaat-e-Islami—face an additional hurdle: even if a referendum endorsed the charter, it would still require parliamentary approval to take effect as law.
A key pledge—that signatory parties will not challenge the charter in court—appears politically significant but not legally dispositive. Any citizen retains standing to litigate alleged constitutional violations, and Bangladesh’s higher courts have previously struck down constitutional changes decades after enactment.
Article 102 preserves the High Court Division’s writ jurisdiction to enforce fundamental rights, allowing challenges from “any person aggrieved,” while the “basic structure” doctrine—recognised by Bangladesh’s Supreme Court—limits amendments that would erode core constitutional features.
Lawyers split over the path to implementation. Jamaat-leaning Supreme Court advocate Shishir Monir urged rapid follow-through—calling for immediate recommendations and swift executive orders—while warning that major dissent notes should be withdrawn to avoid derailing the charter’s future.
By contrast, Supreme Court lawyer Barrister Humayun Kabir Pallob argued that the government lacks constitutional authority to operationalise the charter by “orders,” noting that Article 93’s ordinance power is confined to limited circumstances and does not extend to constitutional change without parliamentary action.
Supreme Court advocate Ishrat Hasan also said that the charter could serve as a policy guide—akin to the non-justiciable “Fundamental Principles of State Policy” in Part II of the Constitution—but has no mandatory legal effect unless incorporated into law.
If ever added to the Constitution, she said, the text must preserve citizens’ fundamental rights and the High Court’s writ powers under Article 102; any curtailment would collide with Bangladesh’s basic-structure jurisprudence.
In the immediate term, the charter stands as a political consensus document. Its fate now hinges on electoral outcomes, coalition arithmetic and whether the next parliament chooses to translate pledges into enforceable law—without infringing constitutional safeguards.
SMS/
