Can reforms ensure good governance?
Just as texts take meaning from their readers, political reforms take shape through those in power. Can the interim government’s initiatives survive the test of political transition?
Roland Barthes, the French literary theorist, in his famous article 'The Death of the Author,' wrote "the birth of the reader must be at the cost of the death of the author." This interesting metaphor argues that once a text is written, its meaning is no longer controlled by its author—it is shaped by those who read it, interpret it and act on it.
This theoretical framework offers a very powerful lens through which we can analyse the possible impact of ongoing reforms initiatives of the interim government of Bangladesh, which has been formed after the July Uprising.
After taking oath on 8 August 2024, the interim government appointed 6 major reform commissions along with other sector specific commissions. It also appointed a national consensus commission in February 2025. The major objectives of these commissions are institutional reform, electoral transparency and to offer measures to uphold the rule of law.
Each commission is tasked with addressing long-standing dysfunctions of governance, justice and public services. Among these commissions, the most powerful National Consensus Commission, headed by the Chief Adviser—with saturated public expectations and enormous critics—has been playing a pivotal role in overseeing and coordinating key reforms initiatives. Its key task is to build political consensus on fundamental reform recommendations and translate them into a unified national roadmap—expected to be announced as the July Charter, the highly pressed topic in the ongoing political landscape.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
Alongside these, several sector-specific reform commissions and advisory bodies have also proposed many additional reform recommendations. These include judicial reforms, restructuring public administration, decentralisations and enhanced parliamentary oversights. Collectively, these initiatives drew a broader roadmap of achieving good governance.
Although many political and academic criticisms exist, these are promising steps on paper. But the pressing questions remain—will the charter and commissions' reports be interpreted with the same spirit, same understanding, and same consensus? Will the next government, possibly with different political positions, honour these commitments and implement them with the same interpretation? According to past instances, the answer is very uncertain. Why is the answer uncertain? Several overlapping and multifaceted factors are involved in this question.
Bangladesh's political history is filled with many examples of well-intended reform initiatives and agreements that were either abandoned, re-interpreted, or reversed depending on who took the chair. For example, the caretaker government system—adopted in the aftermath of Ershad's fall in 1990—was a direct outcome of a historic three-party agreement between the Awami League (AL), BNP, and Jamaat-e-Islami. This consensus-driven framework was designed to ensure the 1991 national election would be free, fair, and credible, and it played a critical role in restoring democratic legitimacy.
However, this system—once considered essential for electoral neutrality—was scrapped in 2011 through the 15th Amendment, allowing the ruling party to oversee elections under its own authority. Similarly, the Digital Security Act, originally enacted as a legal mechanism to safeguard digital spaces, has increasingly been used to target journalists and silence government critics, raising concerns about the shrinking democratic space.
These examples highlight how legal instruments that were once designed to uphold fairness and accountability are now frequently reinterpreted or weaponised to consolidate partisan power.
Similarly, the then AL government amended the Union Parishad Act in 2015, introducing party symbols in local government elections. Although the previous law didn't allow the political parties to nominate candidates for contesting elections with respective party symbols, the AL government had changed the law that served the interest of the then ruling party, rather than upholding electoral neutrality. Even the constitution has been amended several times to reflect the priorities of those in office, not always to protect democratic norms.
These are not only policy shifts or manufacturing of political narratives—they are examples of how texts, once considered permanent, are reinterpreted or rewritten when political control changes. This reinforces a simple but critical truth: in politics, written texts don't enforce themselves. Reforms do not endure because of what is written, these can only be upheld by those who are drivers of the institutions. These reflect the political reality of the country. A well-written charter and commission reports mean very little if they are not backed by the political will to turn them into practice.
Governance in a broader sense - decentralisation, electoral reforms, restructuring public administration and eventually improving services of the government and non-government agencies, making the institutions transparent and accountable, minimising disparity etc. - are not shaped by ideas or texts alone. They can only be reality if enough collective political will exists to enable citizens to exercise.
Perhaps with this understanding, the Consensus Commission has been conducting a series of consultations with political parties. However, an organic approach to building consensus around reform recommendations remains lacking, which has been reflected in the reaction of BNP's secretary general.
Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir stated that the recommendations seem to be sidelining politicians, paving the way for unelected figures to gain influence in governance. This concern partly arises from the way the interim government appointed the commissions—through a top-down process that left the political parties out of the formation process.
As a result, the political parties aiming to win the upcoming election may continue to assert their own positions—even after signing the charter—unless the agreement emerges from a process grounded in shared understanding and mutual engagement.
Therefore, we hope the interim government will adopt a truly organic and participatory approach to reforms, moving from texts to practice, in order to realise the long-awaited good governance—founded on equality, human dignity, and social justice.
Md. Abul Basar is an anthropologist and governance expert and serves as the Project Director at a Switzerland-based international organisation. He can be reached at bashar.arif@gmail.com.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.
