Commentary: Prof Rehman Sobhan Failed to Provide Direction

The 9th annual economists’ conference of the South Asian Network on Economic Modeling (SANEM) was recently held in Dhaka.

On the final day of the conference, the distinguished economist Professor Rehman Sobhan spoke as a special guest in a session titled “Romancing the Reform: The Bangladesh Story.”

According to him, reform does not simply mean enacting laws; it is a continuous process.

The first step is legislation, followed by building the necessary administrative structures for implementation, then ensuring effective enforcement, and finally evaluating the outcomes.

He believes that the ultimate test of reform lies in the democratic process. However, he could not find any significant example of this in Bangladesh’s political practice.

He did, however, cite the transfer of power in the 2001 election involving Sheikh Hasina as an important example.

He argued that without adhering to the democratic norm of transferring power after completing a term in office, it is difficult to establish a culture of accountability in politics.

He also raised questions about the sincerity of political leaders regarding
their electoral promises and their willingness to implement them.

He remarked that there is a lack of clarity among them about how to carry out reforms.

Referring to past examples, he stated that major reforms succeed only when they gain strong public support.

In this context, he mentioned the Six-Point Movement, which was both a political and economic reform framework.

Although it received widespread public support in East Pakistan, it could not be implemented in Pakistan.

He himself could have provided a clear explanation for why it failed, as he was deeply involved in the process.

He and Dr. Kamal Hossain are still alive. Despite various narratives, the reasons why the Six-Point framework was not implemented remain unclear.

Barrister Moinul Hosein also raised this question in his book titled ‘‘Bangladesh..Tragedy of Deceit and Duplicity” but did not receive an answer.

At present, tensions persist between the government and opposition regarding reforms and the implementation of referendum outcomes.

Just as excitement can be harmful to a weak body, similarly, a politically tense environment can be dangerous for a fragile nation.

Professor Rehman Sobhan’s silence on this issue has surprised many, including the author. He did not even mention the establishment of BAKSAL and its impact on democracy.

Nor did he acknowledge how President Ziaur Rahman restored multi-party democracy, or how Begum Khaleda Zia reintroduced parliamentary democracy, ending a presidential one-person rule.

Does this fall outside the scope of his political analysis? If so, it might have been more appropriate to limit the discussion strictly to economics—although that too is not entirely possible, since politics and economics are deeply interconnected.

While discussing the economy, he referred to loan defaulters as part of the political system.

However, he did not clearly explain how dangerous they have become for the economy, politics, and the country, nor did he elaborate on their origins and development.

The reasons for this lack of explanation are not clear to us.Earlier on 23rd April 2025, he expressed more critical views against them in an article published in the esteemed The Daily Prothom Alo.

It would have been better if, as a seniormost intellectual, he had provided guidance on how to address the current economic challenges and the political deadlock facing the country.