Solving the PR question: Why Bangladesh must tread carefully on electoral reform

After the fall of the Awami League regime, several parties, including Jamaat-e-Islami, Islami Andolon Bangladesh and some leaders of the National Citizens' Party (NCP), have called for the introduction of the proportional representation system in the national parliamentary elections. The demand gained much traction after the mass gathering at Suhrawardy Udyan on 28 June 2025. 

According to Article 119 of the Constitution of Bangladesh, the Election Commission is entrusted with the responsibility of overseeing the entire electoral process for both the office of the President and the Jatiya Sangsad (Parliament). Its primary functions include holding presidential and parliamentary elections, delimiting constituencies for parliamentary polls, and preparing electoral rolls for both types of elections. 

The Constitution further stipulates in Article 65(2) that Parliament shall consist of 300 members who are elected from single territorial constituencies through direct voting. This means that citizens of Bangladesh vote directly for their representatives under a one-person-one-vote system. Under the current constitution, there can be no option for PR in the lower house. 

Bangladesh currently uses the First Past the Post, or FPTP, system, where the candidate with the highest votes in an electoral constituency wins. The other system is the Proportional Representation system, where there are no constituency-based candidates. Voters cast their votes for party symbols, and the number of seats a party receives in parliament is determined in proportion to the percentage of votes it secures.

The problem with PR in the lower house 

The proponents of PR in the lower house have been talking about creating more balance and representation in the parliament. Under our current system, the winner takes all. So, there is a high incentive for smaller parties to demand PR in the lower house. 

Dr Sadik Hasan, Professor of Public Administration at the University of Dhaka, thinks, "The smaller parties think that they can get 3-4 seats under the PR system. But the problem is, it has not been tested in Bangladesh ever. Bangladeshis have no idea what PR really is or how it works. That is a problem." 

In Bangladesh, the voters know exactly who they will be voting for. The candidates are known beforehand, and it creates a connection between the MP and the constituency. However, this will not be possible under PR. 

"The main argument for PR is curtailing the power of the prime minister," Hasan said. "The same argument holds for NCC. However, this should not be the priority; the priority should be whether a system would be more democratic or not," he added.

The case for PR in the upper house 

To preserve the balance of power, introducing PR in the upper house can be a good option. 

The Constitution Reform Commission has recommended a bicameral parliament in Bangladesh. The proposed Senate cannot initiate legislation but holds the power to review, amend, or reject bills passed by the lower house. This places it in a secondary, deliberative role, akin to India's Rajya Sabha or Nepal's National Assembly, rather than a co-equal chamber like Italy's Senate or Nigeria's Senate. The inability to propose laws limits its proactive influence, but the capacity to amend or reject bills ensures it can shape legislation significantly. 

The Senate's 105 members include 100 elected via Proportional Representation (PR) by political parties, ensuring representation for smaller parties and requiring at least five seats for marginalised communities. Additionally, five members are nominated by the President from non-parliamentary citizens, adding expertise. 

This design promotes inclusivity and balances the lower house's First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system, which favours larger parties. The Senate's role in constitutional amendments—requiring a two-thirds majority and a national referendum—mirrors Australia's referendum model, ensuring public participation. 

Dr Asif Shahan, an associate professor at the Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka, said, "If you really look at the proposal of the constitutional reform commission, they have given the upper house a minimal role. I think that is mostly because they want to 'sell' a PR upper house to all parties."  

He thinks that, unfortunately, they didn't discuss the oversight role of the upper chamber, which he thinks is important. They allowed the upper chamber to discuss or offer suggestions on bills (except for money bills) while the decision will be made by the lower chamber. 

"That is fine if you consider the stability argument," he said. However, he added, "They didn't give the appointment of oversight institutions power to the upper chamber, which is fine if they can establish NCC. But if they can't establish or can't have an agreement on NCC, then a weak upper house will cost us. Without oversight and appointment power, the upper chamber will be too weak." 

Dr Asif Shahan said, "Honestly speaking, an upper chamber based on PR where only political parties will appoint candidates is better than having nothing at all. But it's not the best. Because an upper house must represent a diverse group of people to offer diverse perspectives and represent diverse interests."

Dr Asif Shahan thinks that what we have right now is an 'elite bargain' between political parties, which is alright for checks and balances. 

"If the upper chamber is elected through PR, there is a possibility that the government and the opposition will be forced to negotiate, which will start the culture of democratic bargaining. However, for that, we need to give the upper chamber oversight and advisory power. If we create an ornamental upper chamber, it will not make sense to have one," he said. 

"There should be a pilot program first to see whether PR works in Bangladesh or not," Dr Sadik Hasan added. "Without any trial, introducing PR in the upper house or the lower house will not be prudent."