Ruling BNP and opposition Jamaat-e-Islami finally agreed to form a special parliamentary committee to pursue constitutional amendments aligned with the proposed July National Charter, following an acrimonious debate in parliament on Tuesday.
The agreement emerged after a two-hour discussion under Rule 62 of the Rules of Procedure, triggered by an adjournment motion from opposition leader Shafikur Rahman. The motion centred on the stalled convening of a Constitutional Reform Council, originally envisioned under an implementation order linked to the July Charter.
Taking part in discussion, Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed, 'on behalf of the Leader of the House', proposed the creation of a "Special Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Amendment", bringing together all political parties and independent MPs represented in the house.
He said the committee would work through dialogue and consensus to draft a "people-oriented" amendment bill aimed at restructuring the state in line with the July Charter.
The opposition leader agreed to join such a committee but insisted it must ensure equal representation between treasury and opposition benches.
However, Law Minister Asaduzzaman dismissed the idea of equal representation, saying that as the treasury got two-thirds majority in the House and so the representation from both sides "can't be equal".
He requested the Speaker to form special committee to amend the constitution in line with the proposal raised by Salahuddin Ahmed. Leader of the House and Prime Minister Tarique Rahman was present throughout the discussion and encouraged his party members through thumping table while they were delivering their speeches.
Opening the debate, Rahman invoked the legacy of the 1971 liberation war, describing himself as coming from "a small family of martyrs" and emphasising shared national ownership.
He criticised what he called the erosion of democratic norms, arguing that "even elected governments had curtailed voting rights and, in some cases, presided over violence against citizens".
Salahuddin Ahmed, however, challenged the legal foundations of the reform process initiated during the post-uprising interim period.
He argued that the presidential order underpinning the proposed Constitutional Reform Council lacked validity, claiming the presidency had "no authority" to issue such orders after April 1973. As a result, he said, the order was "void ab initio" and could not serve as a legal basis for reform.
mirmostafiz@yahoo.com
