‘New constitution requires time’
Staff Reporter :
Law Adviser Asif Nazrul has remarked that it may take a long time to draft a new constitution.
He said, “The national parliament enacts the constitution. A constitutional assembly frames a new constitution. In neighboring countries, it has reportedly taken 8-9 years to draft a new constitution.
So, it could take a long time here as well. In the meantime, should I continue with the Constitution of 1972? Until a new constitution is adopted, the current parliament will function as the constitutional authority. If necessary, it will amend the 1972 Constitution.”
The law adviser made these remarks on Sunday at a discussion held at the Institute of Mother Language in the capital.
Asif Nazrul added, “The constitutional assembly, when it starts working, will continue its task of formulating the new constitution.
I estimate that it may take 2-3 years. Should I then adopt the 1972 Constitution for these 2-3 years? During this interim period, as members of the national parliament carry out their duties, they will be empowered to change some fundamental aspects of the constitution such as the powers of the Prime Minister, Article 17, decentralisation of the higher judiciary, and the independence of the judiciary. These fundamental issues will continue to be revised by the parliament.”
Regarding the incorporation of the July Charter into the constitution, the law adviser said: “A great deal of importance has been placed on the July Charter. We are assuming that there will be widespread agreement on many aspects of it. It may be that some fundamental elements of the July Charter can be retained.”
On the topic of limiting the Prime Minister’s term to two years, Asif Nazrul stated: “This is a popular demand and I support it as well. But just saying the term should be two years isn’t enough; it needs convincing arguments. Check which countries in the world follow this. None actually do not India, not the UK. So, limiting the term to two terms is not the solution. What’s most important is to reduce the powers of the Prime Minister.”
Regarding the powers of the upper house, he noted: “The President can independently appoint the Chief Justice. In Bangladesh’s constitution, the Chief Justice holds immense power he is effectively the second most powerful individual.”
“In some neighbouring countries, the drafting of a new constitution has taken as long as eight to nine years. It can take a long time to formulate a new constitution,” Asif Nazrul noted.
“Will we continue with the 1972 constitution meanwhile?” he asked.
He proposed that the parliament that is active at the time could function as the constitutional authority until a new constitution is enacted and make necessary amendments to the 1972 constitution as needed.
“When they work as the Constituent Assembly, they can continue working on the constitution. In my opinion, that may take around two-three years,” he said.
On the question of incorporating the July Charter into a future constitution, Asif Nazrul said, “We have assumed that there will be widespread consensus on many aspects of the July Charter. It’s possible that some of its fundamental elements could be retained.”
Addressing the growing call for limiting a prime minister’s tenure to two terms, the adviser said, “This is a widely supported demand and I support it too. But simply stating that the prime minister should serve only two terms isn’t enough.”
“You (politicians) need to make a convincing argument. Find out which countries have such a provision. In reality, no such limitation exists in countries like India or the United Kingdom. Just limiting terms isn’t a solution the most important issue is reducing the prime minister’s excessive powers,” he added.
The event was organised to deliberate on 7 proposals put forward by Citizen’s Coalition for Constitutional Reform, aimed at reforming the democratic structure of the state.
BNP Standing Committee Member Salahuddin Ahmed also spoke at the event and argued that rather than drafting an entirely new constitution, the existing one could be amended through national consensus.
“In that case, forming a Constituent Assembly may not be necessary. Amendments are needed because the constitution has become diseased,” he said.
Ali Riaz, vice-president of the National Consensus Commission, said the 1972 constitution itself created room for authoritarian tendencies.
“It gave unilateral power to the prime minister and failed to ensure accountability within the executive branch. It is essential to maintain a balance of power,” he said.