Ban on Awami League is a threat to democracy and political freedom in Bangladesh
Mohammad Yunus's interim government in Bangladesh has announced a historic yet controversial decision to revoke the registration of the Awami League, one of the oldest and largest national political parties. The registration was rescinded under Section 90B of The Representation of the People Order 1972, halting AL's political, electoral, and digital activities on the accusation that the party had been eroding democratic institutions through the course of its tenure since 2008. This was done ostensibly to ensure the safety of the activists and the witnesses testifying in the International Crimes Tribunal (Amended) and will remain in force till the trial is completed. Although national security has been cited as the justification, the ban can be seen as a rupture in the larger foundational beliefs of the nation.
The ban has come into effect by an executive order of the interim government. Through the 13th Constitutional Amendment Act, the system of non-party caretaker government (CTG) was introduced in 1996. Under Article 58B-D, CTG was to be temporary, neutral and non-partisan, with the primary responsibility of conducting free and fair elections within 90 days of the dissolution of the Parliament. The 15th Constitutional Amendment repealed this provision in 2011. The elimination of this article implies there is no constitutional basis for an interim or caretaker administration unless a state of emergency is formally declared under Article 141A–C, or the military takes over through martial law, which is not recognised under the current Constitution but has historically occurred. Therefore, the nature of this interim government is extra-constitutional or de facto, functioning as a transitional administration. The ban on the Awami League could be seen as ultra vires.
Without the people's mandate, this interim government has also made revisions to the national curriculum and textbooks of primary and secondary schools. The new textbooks attribute the declaration of Bangladesh's independence on March 26, 1971, to Ziaur Rahman and the title 'Father of the Nation', associated with Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, has been removed. The interim government has also constituted a nine-member Constitutional Reform Commission to draft the Second Republic Constitution.
A central tenet of democracy — and the accountability inherent in it — is derived from the people's mandate. The ban on Awami League effectively removes the public's ability to judge and choose their representatives through free and fair elections. It is also prejudiced along the following lines.
First, such aggrandisement fosters an authoritarian regime as it eliminates an opposition, and thereby, a necessary competition for ideas. It undermines the very idea of popular sovereignty as stated in Article 7 of the Constitution.
Second, the Awami League-led freedom struggle of Bangladesh was rooted in ideals of democracy, secularism, socialism, and Bengali nationalism. Thus, the spirit of 1971 embedded in the Constitution also faces erosion. The Awami League has a pan-Bangladesh presence and held a decent mandate except in the recent elections. The ban overlooks its historical legacy.
Third, the political backsliding in Bangladesh is not new. Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), founded by military ruler General Ziaur Rahman in 1978, has a nationalist conservative ideological orientation, rooted in Islamic cultural heritage. While Jamaat-e-Islami's politics is ideologically rooted in Sharia rule, the BNP employs religion more strategically, invoking Islamic identity to counter the Awami League's cultural nationalism. During the BNP-Jammat rule from 2001 to 2006, the party faced similar allegations. Systemic attacks on opposition activists and radicalisation fostered a culture of impunity, where key BNP leaders and ministers were accused of shielding terrorists and criminals. These acts not only violated the basic tenets of democracy but also posed serious threats to national security, the very grounds now being invoked to justify the ban on the Awami League. Even though its position is evolving, the BNP had initially stated that the decision to ban AL should rest on the electorate.
Fourth, the new political party, the National Citizens Party (NCP), was officially launched on February 28 this year by leaders from the Jatiya Nagorik Committee and the Students Against Discrimination movement, both of which were central to the July 2024 uprising that led to the ousting of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. In essence, NCP originated from civil society movements, much like the Aam Aadmi Party in India. But, with its novel nature and limited organisational structure or ideology, the party remains issue-based, making it challenging to sustain electoral momentum. The chances of it emerging as an enduring alternative remain low. It risks remaining reactive, rather than programmatic, as it lacks a vision of foreign policy and economic structuring beyond governance reform. Thus, it is in its interest to minimise electoral competition by eliminating AL from the process. Jamaat, an arch rival of Awami League, also seems to share NCP's views: It opposes elections before the trial of Sheikh Hasina and the completion of political reforms.
Democracy is not just about elections: It also entails inclusive representation, respect for dissent, civil liberties, and the rule of law. It withers when opposition and pluralism are slowly suffocated. The ban on Awami League signals a breakdown of democratic norms. While it may offer temporary satisfaction to those opposing the party's vision and ideology, it risks severe consequences for Bangladesh's democratic future and political stability, including persecution and forced migration of minority communities and moderate secular Muslims.
Reintegrating the Awami League into the electoral process would offer voters a genuine choice and restore accountability through ballots rather than bans. If the party is fairly defeated, it would grant democratic legitimacy to the victors, allowing the BNP, NCP, and other parties to govern with credibility. Therefore, Bangladesh's future should be determined through free, fair, and meaningful elections, not executive decrees. As a responsible regional power, India also advocates for adherence to established legal procedures to ensure a democratic and stable Bangladesh.
The writer is professor, School of International Studies, JNU
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
26 minutes ago
- Time of India
Justice Oka highlights the interconnection between environmental justice and social justice at Climate Change Conference
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Former Supreme Court judge Abhay S Oka on Thursday said that environmental justice , as developed by India's constitutional courts, is deeply intertwined with the idea of social justice 'It is my privilege to address this gathering on a very important subject, the environment, which is dear to me. As a judge of the Bombay High Court, Karnataka High Court, and Supreme Court, I was lucky enough to deal with many environmental matters,' Justice Oka said at the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF) Climate Change Conference and Awards emphasized that environmental issues go beyond preserving nature and have direct consequences on the lives and health of human beings.'When we talk about environmental justice, social justice inevitably comes into the picture. Protection of the environment is not only necessary for preserving natural resources available on planet Earth, but more importantly, it is essential for human beings to lead a healthy, constructive, and meaningful life. If we are not able to preserve our environment and protect it from degradation, we are doing an injustice to society at large,' he gave Delhi's recurring winter air pollution crisis as an example of inequality in environmental access.'That is where social justice comes into the picture. One classic example is Delhi. Every year, from December to February, we are hit by massive air pollution. Most of the people present here today can afford air purifiers at home, but the majority of Delhi's population living in shanties or working on the streets can't afford air purifiers.'Justice Oka stressed that constitutional guarantees of social justice must include environmental protection, citing how pollution affects livelihoods, particularly among vulnerable communities like fishermen.'Take, for example, pollution of our rivers or our seas affects the livelihood of the fishing community. Thus, every environmental issue, every degradation, every destruction of the environment has a direct nexus with social justice guaranteed by the Constitution.'He highlighted that environmental degradation also affects economic justice and the national economy, disproportionately impacting the poor. He reaffirmed the significance of legal doctrines such as sustainable development and the polluter pays principle , developed by courts to safeguard environmental also questioned the country's definition of development: whether it should be limited to infrastructure like highways and flyovers, or be reoriented toward providing essentials to the poor. He warned that the current path would render sustainable development from over four decades of legal experience, he observed that very few citizens engage with environmental concerns seriously, and those who do are often labeled as anti-development.'I have been part of several environmental decisions in the Bombay High Court, Karnataka High Court, and the Supreme Court. What I find from my long experience of 20 years as a lawyer and nearly 22 years as a judge of three constitutional courts is that very few citizens show enthusiasm and courage to take up environmental issues. It is not easy to address environmental concerns, as those who raise these issues rarely get active societal support.'He added that environmental defenders are often misunderstood and vilified for standing against damaging practices.'Those advocating environmental causes rarely received societal support, and in such a case, how could they expect to receive support from the government?'Referring to the landmark MC Mehta case, Justice Oka said the Supreme Court's directions laid the foundation for environmental jurisprudence, but questioned if society has truly honored those who led the charge.'Have we adequately honoured or remembered him (Mehta, who filed the PIL), especially today, as we celebrate World Environment Day?'He also reflected on his past work addressing noise pollution caused by illegal loudspeaker use during festivals.'Noise pollution caused by religious festivals affects human health seriously. Everyone has a constitutional right not to be compelled to hear what they don't wish to, yet illegal use of loudspeakers continues, forcing people to endure unwanted noise. Noise pollution isn't just irritating, it impacts hearing capacity and brain functioning.'Justice Oka concluded with a call for humility and awareness, emphasizing that humanity is a part of nature—not its owner.'We degrade and destroy the environment under the wrong notion that the earth belongs to us, but in fact, we belong to the earth. Some of us are under the wrong notion that the environment belongs to us. In fact, we belong to the environment.'Quoting Article 21 of the Constitution, he reminded that the right to dignity includes the right to live in a clean, pollution-free environment.'If you are living in an atmosphere polluted by air and other forms of pollution, you cannot live with dignity. Protecting the environment, including the manmade and natural environments, is of great concern for human existence.'[Inputs from PTI]
United News of India
32 minutes ago
- United News of India
SILF Climate Change Conference 2025 honours Justice Abhay S. Oka with Sustainability Award
New Delhi, June 5 (UNI) In a stirring convergence of law and environmental consciousness, the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF) hosted the SILF Climate Change Conference and Awards 2025 in New Delhi on World Environment Day, recognising the Indian judiciary's unwavering role in protecting the environment and promoting sustainable development. The event was graced by Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge of the Supreme Court of India, as Chief Guest, and Justice Jasmeet Singh, Judge of the Delhi High Court, as Guest of Honour. The highlight of the ceremony was the presentation of the SILF Sustainability Award 2025 to Justice Abhay S. Oka, former Supreme Court Judge, for his extraordinary contributions to environmental jurisprudence in India. Delivering a powerful keynote, Justice Oka stated, 'Environmental justice cannot be separated from social and economic justice. Pollution and environmental degradation hurt the most vulnerable the hardest, affecting their dignity and the basic rights under Article 21 of our Constitution.' He lamented the lack of recognition for environmental activists and emphasised the need to translate judicial principles into action. 'On World Environment Day, we must honour the unsung heroes of environmental protection and turn our ideals into tangible action,' he added. Justice Jasmeet Singh stressed the urgency of the climate crisis and the judiciary's pivotal role: 'The crisis we face today is a consequence of unsustainable development. But landmark judgments like M.C. Mehta prove that environmental conservation and progress must coexist.' He urged society to embrace sustainability as a path to innovation and collective prosperity, not merely a challenge. 'It is through collective effort that climate change can become a catalyst for resilient growth,' he said. "We Belong to Mother Earth": Justice Sanjay Karol Justice Sanjay Karol made an emotional plea for grassroots environmental action: 'We must stop viewing climate change as a problem to be solved later. It is a climate emergency now. The courts have done their part, now every citizen must rise to the occasion.' He dismissed the notion that judicial activism hinders economic growth, asserting that both can progress in harmony to achieve constitutional goals of sustainability. Dr. Lalit Bhasin, President of SILF and Chairman of the CII National Committee on Legal Services, applauded the judiciary's role. He said, 'The judgments of our courts have sown seeds of environmental accountability in India's governance landscape. These precedents are now the guiding light for lawmakers, regulators, and businesses alike.' The Awards Ceremony honoured key individuals and organisations for championing sustainability, Justice Abhay S. Oka, Retired Supreme Court Judge, Dr. Bina Modi, Chairperson, Modi Enterprises, Meenakshi Arora, Senior Advocate, Prof. (Dr.) S. Shanthakumar, VC, Gujarat National Law University, Rajesh Jha, Regional Legal Director, South Asia, Reckitt India, Sharad Aggarwal, CEO, Godfrey Phillips India, Additionally, Plaques of Honour were presented to Justice Karol and Justice Jasmeet Singh for their sustained commitment to environmental justice. Engaging Panel Discussions on Judicial Responsibility, Two thematic panels 'Courts as Saviours of Clean Air, Trees, Rivers, Forests, and Climate in India' and 'Role of Judiciary in Balancing Economic Development and Sustainability'/featured rich dialogues by experts on how India's legal framework must evolve to address the country's ecological challenges. The SILF Climate Change Conference and Awards 2025 reaffirmed that law and climate responsibility are inextricably linked and that India's legal fraternity must remain at the forefront of environmental stewardship. UNI SNG RN
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Kannada Sahitya Parishat seeks to join petition against Kamal film release
Bengaluru: The Kannada Sahitya Parishat (KSP), has filed an impleading application before the high court in connection with a petition filed by Chennai-based Raajkamal Films International, producer of the Kamal Haasan-starrer 'Thug Life'. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Opposing the plea for police protection sought by the production house for the film's release in Karnataka, KSP, through its president Mahesh Joshi, argued that the Constitution does not grant absolute protection to speech, especially when it is likely to disturb public harmony or hurt the dignity of a language and its people. Referring to Kamal's controversial remark that Kannada originated from Tamil, KSP called it an intentional or reckless statement that undermines the status of Kannada. The apex body for Kannada literature also stated that the actor has not issued a formal apology or made any sincere attempt to clarify his stand. In its filing, KSP contended that police resources should not be used to protect commercial interests. It added that public protests, boycott calls, or expressions of anger over the film are all part of democratic expression, and do not automatically amount to unlawful threats that merit state protection. "The very Constitution the petitioner invokes to seek protection also allows peaceful dissent and criticism. To oppose a film is not to endanger law and order," KSP said. On June 3, the court adjourned the hearing after the filmmakers assured that 'Thug Life' would not be released in Karnataka until a dialogue is held with the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC). The matter is now posted to June 13 for further hearing.
