Parliament under pressure
After nearly 17 years without a strong parliamentary opposition during Sheikh Hasina’s rule, Bangladesh’s 13th Parliament has seen the emergence of a more vocal opposition bloc, bringing greater scrutiny to government policies, decision-making and governance.
But the growing confrontation between the BNP-led government and the Jamaat-e-Islami-led 11-party opposition alliance is now testing whether the country’s parliamentary democracy can accommodate robust dissent while preserving the dignity and effectiveness of the House.
Repeated opposition walkouts and the threat of a complete boycott of parliamentary proceedings have fuelled debate over whether dialogue and institutional scrutiny or political confrontation will shape Bangladesh’s parliamentary future.
Dr Badiul Alam Majumdar, secretary of Shushasoner Jonno Nagorik (SHUJAN), told The New Nation that both the government and opposition must work to make Parliament effective by debating major national issues and problems facing ordinary people.
“Parliament is fundamentally a place of solving problems,” he said, stressing that while the opposition should support the government’s legitimate work, ruling party lawmakers must also treat the opposition properly inside the House in the broader interest of the people.
He said the opposition had a democratic right to boycott Parliament over a particular issue, but a permanent boycott would not be a wise decision and would serve no one well.
Majumdar warned that unless political parties bring about a major qualitative change in their behaviour and thinking, Parliament and the wider political system could slide back into the crises that have plagued the country in the past.
Walkout over ‘piecemeal’ reforms
The latest confrontation came on the opening day of the third session of the 13th Parliament on Thursday (August 27), when opposition lawmakers led by Opposition Leader Dr Shafiqur Rahman staged a coordinated walkout.
The protest came shortly before the government tabled three key bills, including the National Human Rights Commission Bill, 2026, and the Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Bill, 2026.
The opposition accused the treasury bench of sidestepping commitments made under the July Charter by introducing the measures as standalone bills rather than through the proposed Constitutional Reform Council.
The alliance described the government’s approach as “fragmented” or “piecemeal” reform.
“We are firmly and clearly in favour of the main demand for reforms. We believe piecemeal bills will suppress that core mandate, and we will not participate in suppressing it,” Shafiqur said before leading opposition MPs out of the chamber.
The alliance also objected to the bills being tabled on Thursday, traditionally observed as Private Members’ Day, arguing that the use of government time further undermined parliamentary procedure.
Wider grievances
The opposition has raised a broader set of grievances, accusing the government of conducting parliamentary business unilaterally and in what it called a “parliamentary authoritarian” manner.
Lawmakers said the Speaker’s office had failed to provide adequate time to debate the country’s continuing electricity and gas crisis, rising commodity prices and deteriorating law and order.
The alliance also protested delays in forming a special committee on constitutional amendments and implementing the outcome of the referendum on the July Charter.
Deputy Leader of the Opposition Dr Syed Abdullah Mohammed Taher warned that if the government continued to ignore the alliance’s demands, opposition lawmakers might be forced to take the more drastic step of a complete parliamentary boycott.
Criticising the conduct of the government and ruling party in the House, Taher said the Awami League, despite its shortcomings, had not treated the opposition in the manner the current government was doing.
He also accused the BNP of going back on commitments it made to the public over the referendum and July Charter.
Dialogue or confrontation?
The opposition wants the reform agenda, particularly commitments under the July Charter, addressed through a clear and credible institutional process.
The government, meanwhile, appears intent on pursuing legislation and parliamentary business within the existing constitutional framework.
That divergence has intensified tensions between the two sides.
Sources said opposition MPs had been instructed to raise the issues forcefully in upcoming sittings and press the government for clarity over implementation of the July Charter.
If the response is deemed unsatisfactory, the alliance could stage further walkouts and move towards a longer-term boycott.
An opposition MP told reporters that lawmakers could walk out again on Sunday and subsequently stay away from proceedings as the alliance weighs its next move.
For a Parliament emerging from years of weak opposition, the developments represent an early test of whether political differences can be managed through debate and dialogue, allowing the House to fulfil its central democratic role of scrutinising government and representing the public.
