Deadlock over key reforms: Is there any solution in sight?

Infographic: TBS

The two-months-long first round of talks between the National Consensus Commission and political parties could not result in conclusive consensus on any key constitutional reform proposals to improve checks and balances and prevent the resurgence of another autocrat. 

Parties have partially agreed on some proposals. But more discussions are needed to minimise the difference in opinions or the methods of implementation. A clear deadlock has emerged. The reality on the ground is not particularly inspiring; disagreements over the election timeline are turning volatile fast. 

The interim government has emphasised on key reforms before elections. A fast resolution is possible only if BNP, Jamaat-e-Islami and NCP radically change their position on key contentious issues, which is unlikely in the prevailing confrontational political situation. Can the deadlock be broken soon through the second round of talks set to begin in June? 

'Proceed with agreed upon reforms; leave rest for next government'

Badiul Alam Majumdar; Member, National Consensus Commission

Sketch: TBS

We are looking at a situation where, despite broad consensus on the need for reforms, serious disagreements persist over their implementation. 

It is a classic case of 'the devil is in the details.' For example, there is significant discord among major parties regarding the structure and timeline of the upcoming elections. 

What is crucial now is for all parties to come together and reach a united agreement to ensure a fast, fair and credible election. While reform proposals are important — and many are already in progress — the interim government faces practical constraints in executing all of them before the polls. 

The government can proceed with reforms that enjoy consensus, potentially through an ordinance, while deferring the more contentious ones until after the election. At this moment, national unity and political agreement are paramount to move forward constructively.

'Swift, broadly acceptable reforms would have been more effective'

David Bergman; British Investigative Journalist 

Sketch: TBS

In hindsight, one can say that the process of seeking consensus on reforms has taken too long. 

Instead of establishing commissions to produce lengthy reports, it would arguably have been more effective to forge a set of key reform proposals acceptable to all major political forces — proposals that could have been enacted swiftly. 

Now, nine months after the fall of the Hasina government, the BNP appears to hold a markedly stronger position than it did earlier on. 

Since no reform agreement can proceed without the party's consent, and it wants elections sooner rather than later, this likely means that, for better or worse, any pre-election reform package will be modest. 

'Reforms can continue to happen alongside election roadmap'

Abul Kasem Khan; Chairperson, BUILD

Sketch: TBS

From a business perspective, with due respect to political parties, we want rule of law, stability and risk-free investments. Whoever is in the government, they must ensure these things to us. 

The confusion that has arisen regarding the election is a problem. We are dealing with foreigners, and they always ask us what the transitional roadmap is. They need to know if the investments in Bangladesh will be secure or not. 

If there is an elected government with a set amount of time to govern, whether it's four or five years, it ensures continuity of the laws and policies during their reign. So, for an interim government, even if they have good policies, foreign investors become concerned that this can change abruptly anytime. 

As such, a roadmap of the election would be beneficial. There needs to be a commitment. If we have a date for the election, even if it is a year or two down the road, we can still work around it as long as we have a clear roadmap. This will help us plan our businesses properly.

Secondly, we also want reforms. I think the interim government should look into the reforms suggested by the various commissions as quickly as possible. We do not want the same type of elections resulting in the same type of governments we have seen in the past. We want the rule of law and injustice to stop. 

Whichever government is elected should ensure good governance. The reforms that are needed for such a government to exist can continue to happen alongside the elections. It is not the case that all reforms must be finished first. 

However, for this to happen, the political parties have to cooperate and agree to continue the reforms that have been started if they come into power. We do not want to go back to the previous system of ruling with absolute power. 

Abul Kasem Khan spoke to TBS earlier on 25 May.

'All reforms will need 10-15 years to be completed'

Dr Saimum Parvez; Political Analyst 

Sketch: TBS

BNP was the first political party in the country to talk about reforms, and forming various commissions to discuss such reforms was part of BNP's agenda for years. BNP has the vision to think about the future of Bangladesh after Sheikh Hasina. 

Now, there are some who claim that BNP does not want reforms, which is completely baseless. We will reach a consensus about reforms through negotiations with the reform commissions and other political parties. 

Now, if the commission or others think that BNP has to accept every recommendation, then there is no point in talking to the political parties. Every reform has a political perspective which is unique to a political party. And there will be differences, which is quite normal. The point is, does the BNP want reform? Absolutely! How the reforms would work out is the point of negotiation. 

Now, expecting the BNP to agree to every reform demand unconditionally is an authoritarian attitude. 

Ultimately, the country will be governed by a political entity. The reforms will need to be carried out by a political government too. The interim government can give a guideline to carry out reforms, but ultimately, those reforms must be carried out by a political government. Reformation is an endless process. What the interim government has on the plate will need 10-15 years to be completed. Giving elections after completing reforms is therefore absurd. 

The interim government can lay out the plan for reform for the political parties and create a consensus among them to ensure that the major reforms are carried out by the elected party, as the political entity is the only entity that truly represents the people. 

The interim government should create a consensus among the political parties within December, but no later than January. We have two to three months to reach a consensus, because we need three months to prepare for the election. The interim government need not do the reforms themselves; it will only make our lives more complex and bring chaos. The political parties will not be on board on every reform proposal, and it is normal.