The fall of Ershad and the unfulfilled promises of three alliances' framework
The framework was drafted by the Awami League–led 15-party alliance, the BNP–led seven-party alliance, and the five-party left alliance. Jamaat-e-Islami also joined the movement with similar demands but did not belong to any alliance.
Today (6 December) marks 36 years since the fall of Hussain Muhammad Ershad. His resignation in December 1990 followed a political framework announced by three major alliances leading the anti-autocracy movement.
At the time, analysts saw it as a complete framework for transferring power and guiding future governance. However, most of its promises were never fulfilled, reported BBC Bangla.
The framework was drafted by the Awami League–led 15-party alliance, the BNP–led seven-party alliance, and the five-party left alliance. Jamaat-e-Islami also joined the movement with similar demands but did not belong to any alliance.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
As the movement peaked, the three alliances announced the framework on 19 November from separate rallies. Its core goal was to remove Ershad and hold a sovereign parliamentary election under a non-partisan caretaker government.
Following the outline, a general election was held on 27 February 1991 under a neutral caretaker authority. Researcher Mohiuddin Ahmed says the framework succeeded only in two areas -- removing Ershad and ensuring a neutral election. He adds that the major political parties later ignored their commitments and often acted in the opposite way.
What the framework demanded
1. Free the country from Ershad's autocratic rule and establish full democracy in line with the spirit of independence and the Liberation War.
i. Following constitutional provisions, including Articles 51(a)3, 55(a)1, and 51(3), Ershad and his government would be compelled to resign. Power would be handed over to a non-partisan and neutral person acceptable to the three alliances via the vice president.
ii. An interim caretaker government would be formed under the acting president to ensure a free and fair election for a sovereign parliament within three months.
2. Duties and restrictions of the caretaker government.
i. The head and ministers would remain strictly non-partisan and not contest the election.
ii. The interim government would conduct only routine administration and reorganise the Election Commission to ensure independence.
iii. Voters would be guaranteed freedom to cast their votes independently.
iv. State media, including radio and television, would be made independent and autonomous to ensure neutrality and equal access for all political parties.
3. The caretaker government would transfer power to the sovereign parliament elected through free and fair elections and remain accountable to it.
4. Constitutional safeguards.
i. The sovereignty of the people would be recognized, constitutional governance maintained, and any unconstitutional attempt to seize power prevented.
ii. Fundamental rights would be protected, judicial independence ensured, and the rule of law upheld.
iii. All laws violating fundamental rights would be abolished.
What happened afterward?
Following the framework, the alliances selected Chief Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed as the non-partisan figure to lead the caretaker government. Ershad appointed him vice president and transferred power to him.
Shahabuddin Ahmed's caretaker government held the eleventh parliamentary election, which the BNP won. The new parliament amended the constitution to shift from a presidential to a parliamentary system, fulfilling one of the outline's commitments.
However, according to Badiul Alam Majumdar, the rest of the promises were abandoned. Parliament became ineffective, interest-based politics grew, and authoritarian tendencies deepened within the ruling party. The opposition also failed to act responsibly.
Over time, the electoral system deteriorated, eventually contributing to the mass uprising of 2024, highlighting the failed outcome of the original outline.
Mujahidul Islam Selim added, "The pledge was that no one would engage in negative propaganda or blame each other, but no one followed this. In fact, the code of conduct was completely ignored. They also began the practice of using religion in election campaigns starting from the 1991 election," the report added.
