Holding referendum before polls is 'completely against the law': Shahdeen Malik

Constitutional expert and senior lawyer Dr Shahdeen Malik has asserted that the proposal to hold a referendum before parliamentary elections is "completely against the law" and based on an "unrealistic premise." 

Speaking to reporters at the Supreme Court premises this afternoon (3 November), Shahdeen Malik clarified the standard legal procedure for referendums, saying, "Typically, a referendum is held after the parliament passes a law or constitutional amendment, allowing the people to decide whether to accept it." 

He stressed that globally, the custom is for a proposal to be passed in parliament first and then presented to the public for referendum. 

Reach consensus on referendum in a week, or govt will decide: Advisory Council to political parties

"And if I say from a legal perspective, when we talk about a referendum, the custom in all countries of the world is that a proposal is passed in parliament, and then it goes to the people for a referendum. First a referendum, then the election, this is against the law."

Shahdeen Malik added that the complaint raised by the BNP regarding the referendum is "certainly significant," noting that issues were discussed and later ignored constitutes a "serious concern." 

He also argued that the proposed timeline for constitutional amendments undermines the sovereignty of the parliament.

When is the referendum? Fresh row triggers fresh anxiety

"It is also being said that the elected parliament will amend the constitution within 270 days. If this fails, the proposals of the consensus commission will automatically be placed in the constitution. The question is, if the decision to place it automatically has been made, what is the point of discussing it within 270 days? If the result has been announced in advance, what is the benefit of discussing it. It is a completely unreasonable and unrealistic proposal."

Shahdeen Malik said, "The proposal to create an upper house in parliament is also unconstitutional."

Referendum before the election: Who benefits and who loses?

He noted that out of 17 constitutional amendments, six have been cancelled by the High Court due to "unconstitutional decisions."

He highlighted the contradiction, saying, "The current constitution states that there will be a unicameral national parliament in Bangladesh. Now if it is made bicameral, then isn't it contradictory?"

According to Dr Malik, these new proposals effectively mean "declaring the current constitution null and void", as no unconstitutional amendment can be made while the present constitution remains in force.