Constitutionally a dual citizen (say, a British citizen of Bangladeshi origin) can become the Chief Justice of the People's Republic of Bangladesh (by becoming a High Court Judge, then a Judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, and then the Chief Justice), but he cannot contest in parliamentary election to become a Member of Parliament (MP). Interestingly, before the Fifteenth Amendment came into force (which repealed the provision of the Caretaker Government), a British citizen of Bangladeshi origin could become the head of the government of Bangladesh (by becoming a High Court Judge, then a Judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, then the Chief Justice and, upon retirement, finally by being the Head of a Caretaker Government).
How funny the constitutional provision was and still is? This may look awkward and inconsistent, but this is what the reality is under the current constitutional provisions of Bangladesh.
Let us look at the constitutional provisions that relate to the appointment of High Court Judges and their eligibility for contesting election to be elected as MPs. According to Article 95 of the constitution, a person shall not be qualified for appointment as a Judge of the Supreme Court, comprising the Appellate Division and High Court Division, unless he is a citizen of Bangladesh and - (a) has, for not less than ten years, been an Advocate of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh; or (b) has, for not less than ten years, held judicial office in the territory of Bangladesh; or (c) has such other qualifications as may be prescribed by law for appointment as a Judge of the Supreme Court. On the other hand, in relation to the qualifications needed to contest parliamentary election and the disqualification from being eligible to do so, Article 66 of the Constitution says, inter alia, (1) a person shall, subject to the provisions of clause (2), be qualified to be elected as, and to be, to be a Member of Parliament if he is a citizen of Bangladesh and has attained the age of twenty-five years, (2) a person shall be disqualified for election as, or for being a Member of Parliament who - (a) is declared by a competent court to be of unsound mind; (b) is an undercharged insolvent; (c) acquires the citizenship of, or affirms or acknowledges allegiance to, a foreign State; d) has been, on conviction for a criminal offence involving moral turpitude, sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years, unless a period of five years has elapsed since his release, (e) has been convicted of any offence under the Bangladesh Collaborators (Special Tribunals) Order, (f) holds any office of profit in the service of the Republic other than an office which is declared by law. Sub-clause (2A) of Article 66 further says, "Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-clause (c) of clause (2) of this article, if any person being in the case of dual citizenship gives up the foreign citizenship; or in other cases, again accepts the citizenship of Bangladesh - for the purpose of article, he shall not be deemed to acquire the citizenship of a foreign State."
The above constitutional provisions clearly show that one would have to be a citizen of Bangladesh to become a Supreme Court Judge or MP. There is no doubt on this. However, a dual national of Bangladeshi origin (say, a British-Bangladeshi) can become a Supreme Court Judge [no barrier in Article 95 of the Constitution], but he cannot become an MP [Article 66(2)(c) of the Constitution].
But the rational approach would be to allow all dual nationals of Bangladeshi origins to take active part in each and every sector of the state, including the Supreme Court and Parliament. In fact, currently we have a few Judges in the Supreme Court of Bangladesh who have dual nationality and they have been performing their duties competently. They have, by now, shown their outstanding wisdom and ability. A dual national of Bangladeshi origin cannot become an MP unless he or she renounces his or her foreign nationality. If a person is a dual national (i.e. a British citizen of Bangladeshi origin), he or she must renounce his/her British citizenship before submitting nomination paper for parliamentary election.
Now the question is: who performs more important tasks? A Supreme Court Judge or an MP? I would not attempt to answer the question. Rather, I will leave it to the readers - to the general public. However, what I would say is that the tasks of the Supreme Court Judges are in no way less important than the MPs. The Supreme Court Judges are considered as the guardians of the Constitution. They are the protectors of the fundamental rights of the citizens of the Republic enshrined in Part III of the constitution. They have inherent power and original jurisdiction. When taking the oath on their appointment, the Supreme Court Judges recite, among others, "I will preserve, protect and defend the constitution and the laws of Bangladesh" (Third Schedule: Article 148 of the constitution: oaths and affirmations]. Although MPs are considered to be lawmakers, they do not [in fact, they are not required to] recite those words when taking their oath.
Under the constitutional provisions which pertained prior to the Fifteenth Amendment, the last retired Chief Justice was supposed to become the Chief Advisor of the Caretaker Government [Article 58C of the Constitution]. As we all know, during the tenure of the Caretaker Government, the Chief Advisors enjoyed the status and privileges of the Prime Minister [Article 58C(11) of the Constitution]. Now it looks funny that a dual national of Bangladeshi origin could have become the Head of Government and seen and signed all confidential files of the state, but would still not be eligible to be
an MP!
Time has come to think about it seriously. If a dual national could have aimed to become the Head of the Government and now can aim to become the Chief Justice of the Republic, why can the same person not aim to become an MP? What is the point of putting in or keeping an unreasonable barrier in the constitution on the way of those with dual nationality to become MPs? What purpose is the provision supposed to serve and what advantage is it supposed to confer? It should be noted that in order to contest in British parliamentary elections, one does not even need to be a British citizen. Nor does he need to be an electorate in the particular constituency where one intends to contest from. A candidate only needs to be a voter and have a permanent residence status in the United Kingdom (indefinite leave to remain or permanent residence holder)! A candidate does not even need to renounce his or her original nationality. If a Bangladeshi citizen, by being an indefinite leave holder, can contest in the British Parliamentary elections, why can someone who is a Bangladeshi citizen by birth but also has British citizenship by naturalisation (as opposed to registration by birth), not aspire to become a Member of Parliament in Bangladesh?
The Minister for Local Government and Rural Development (LGRD) Syed Ashraful Islam [Secretary General of the ruling Awami League too] said at a public meeting in London some years ago, that expatriate British Bangladeshis should not only be given voting rights but they should also be able to contest in the parliamentary elections to become MPs. We have been assured by his declaration, which no doubt carries much weight as it was made by a heavyweight minister. We believe the minister and his party and the government will bring this declaration into reality by bringing an appropriate amendment to the constitution. Bangladesh would benefit immensely if dual nationals were given the chance to make a contribution to nation building. Dual nationals of Bangladeshi origin [who are well settled and established overseas] would probably have a lot to give for a developing country like Bangladesh. We have thousands of dual national graduates (who have graduated from world class universities, such as Oxford University, Cambridge University, Harvard University, London University, Heidelberg University etc.,) and professionals in diverse fields. They can utilise their invaluable talents in taking their homeland forward if they are given a chance. They may have taken foreign citizenship as an advantage and privilege for practical reasons, but they have not given up their original nationality. They are not required to give up their nationality of origin. They should not be ignored. Otherwise, Bangladesh would ultimately be the loser. The LGRD minister himself was an expatriate - lived and worked a long period in London. No one would better understand than him the potential of British Bangladeshis.
The writer, a Bar-at-Law, is a legal analyst and columnist.
ahmedlaw2002@yaho.co.uk
© 2026 - All Rights with The Financial Express
