July National Charter: Does it fall short of reform hopes?
The signing of the July National Charter on 17 October 2025 was intended to mark a new chapter in Bangladesh's post Sheikha Hasina political transition. Drafted by the interim government led by Muhammad Yunus and the National Consensus Commission, the Charter outlines plans for constitutional and administrative reforms inspired by the 2024 July Uprising. Yet the Charter's release has stirred disappointment and division. While 24 parties endorsed it by signing it, the National Citizens' Party (NCP) and several leftist groups refused to sign, citing its weak legal foundation and vague commitments to equality and governance reform. TBS spoke to political analysts, experts and business leaders to delve deeper into the issues that continue to cast doubt over the efficacy of this Charter.
The Charter has failed to meet the aspirations of the people
Anu Muhammad
Member of Ganatantrik Odhikar Committee and Noted Economist
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
After much deliberation, political parties and the government finally prepared the July Charter—a document outlining what they intend to do if they come to power.
The Charter contains some positive elements, such as limiting the powers of the prime minister and setting clear guidelines for the appointment of judges. However, the historical narrative it presents is fragmented. For instance, it fails to clarify the roles different groups played during the Liberation War. Moreover, the Charter does not adequately emphasise the importance of state neutrality. It should have clearly stated that the state must remain impartial in matters of ethnicity, religion, and gender. Without such a provision, there is a significant risk of the majority's dominance expanding. Still, the recognition of other ethnic groups is a welcome inclusion.
On the other hand, the Charter offers little to address inequality faced by women and working-class people.
I also find it difficult to understand why the NCP did not sign the Charter, given that they had been involved since the beginning. The reasoning they have provided is unconvincing, and their reference to a "legal basis" remains unclear.
Another concerning point is that issues marked with "notes of dissent" in the July Charter cannot be taken to the court. I see no justification for this restriction. It appears similar to the previous government's approach, where criticism of the Constitution was effectively prohibited.
Despite a few commendable aspects, the July Charter has ultimately failed to meet the aspirations of the people.
The Charter lacks concrete plan to boost law and order
Mohammad Hatem
President of the Bangladesh Knitwear Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BKMEA)
As a businessman, I did not have many expectations regarding the July Charter, although as a citizen I do hold some hopes.
Personally, I find it quite surprising that the very group around which the July Charter was formed—the National Citizens' Party—chose not to sign it. Still, I believe that if all political parties act sincerely and reach a greater understanding in the near future, it is possible to achieve more positive outcomes.
What has concerned us most is the lack of law and order during yesterday's singing event. It sends a worrying message about future stability. Moreover, the Charter includes very few practical measures to improve law and order—an issue of great concern for the business community, as investment depends heavily on it.
Overall, many things are still uncertain and unclear.
The core spirit—ending discrimination—is not clearly reflected
Altaf Parvez
Researcher of South and Southeast Asian History and Politics
The uprising was driven by the desire to fight discrimination. In our society, those who suffer the most are farmers, workers, Dalits, and women. Yet, if we consider the July Charter as a key outcome of that movement, there is little sign that the lives of these groups will improve anytime soon. The farming community, in particular, seems to have gained nothing from it.
Another major goal of the uprising was to reform the administration and the police. These two sectors have struggled since independence, but they deteriorated further under Sheikh Hasina's rule—especially the police. Unfortunately, the Consensus Commission has not made any strong or meaningful decisions on these issues. Many people also hoped that Bangladesh would finally move away from its colonial-style system of governance, but that has not happened either.
On the other hand, the NCP's current actions also seem to have come too late. It's true that the true spirit of the July Uprising is missing in the Charter, and the NCP's position is unlikely to bring any real change. They have already enjoyed the perks of being seen as the "mastermind" and have several members in the advisory council. They also took part in the Consensus Commission but couldn't achieve the goals. So, their recent moves do not inspire much hope.
Meanwhile, ordinary citizens still do not fully understand what the July Charter actually represents. It appears to remain limited within the capital, disconnected from other parts of the country.
Measures to prevent the concentration of power remain unresolved
Asif M. Shahan
Professor, Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka
The July Charter we have now is not very different from the earlier July Declaration—mostly a few new sections and some minor changes in the wording.
Over the past month, the Consensus Commission has held extensive discussions about holding a referendum. While it is clear that a referendum will happen, there is no concrete plan for how it will actually be carried out.
Moreover, one of the main reasons for amending the Constitution was to ensure power is not overly centralised. Although some steps have been taken, many issues still carry "notes of dissent."
In short, the Charter's measures to stop power from becoming too concentrated remain unresolved, and there is no clear roadmap for how—or even if—agreement will be reached.
