Bangladesh, Constitution, Politics

Current Constitutional Governance Crisis in Bangladesh: A Legal Postmortem

M Rafiqul Islam

The interim government is obliged to demonstrate its legitimacy which cannot be invented or plucked from trees. Its legitimacy must come from only one source, called the Constitution of Bangladesh. Notwithstanding its unelected and precarious constitutional status, the interim government is acting like a ‘touch stone’ as if anything it touches and incorporates into the Constitution becomes inviolable law. Its two documents in particular, the July Charter and its referendum, fall far short of their constitutionality. They are ill-conceived and short-sighted rickety political conundrums at their best with ample potential for fierce political confrontations at their worst.

(Keynote address to an international seminar on Bangladesh held in the Jubilee Seminar Hall of the New South Wales Parliament House, 6 Macquarie Street, Sydney on 2 February 2026 at 2-5 pm) Honourable Chair, distinguished guests, learned commentators, and dear audience, Let me begin by providing a brief context for this talk. Bangladesh commenced its journey of good governance under a popular and accountable democratic Constitution in 1972. Since 1975, it has been on a roller-coaster ride from parliamentary, presidential, martial law, military dominated turncoat democracy, a return to parliamentary government, and, most recently, an unelected interim government. The current interim government is the product of the political uprising in July 2024 which ousted the Sheikh Hasina administration that had been in power since 2008. Against this backdrop, this paper offers an academic lawyer’s opinion and legal analysis based strictly on the hard-core provisions of the Constitution of Bangladesh still in force without any inference and extrapolation. I will endeavour

to present this analysis simply, without diluting its legal rigour. Legal Status of the Interim Government Following the fall of Sheikh Hasina government, the Prime Minister departed for India. It was initially unclear whether she intented to led a government in exile, as has occurred in other historical contexts, such as the Sihanouk government of Cambodia, which went to China after he was overthrown and ran a government in exile parallel to the Pol Pot regime. No such attempt was made. Instead, a public declaration announced that Sheikh Hasina had resigned, although her resignation letter has never been disclosed despite public demands and a writ petition filed in the High Court Division. Subsequently, the President publicly admitted that he had never received any resignation letter. This situation created a governance vacuum. To address it, the President invoked Article 106 of the Constitution and sought an advisory opinion from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court (AD). The Article 106 empowers…

Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.
We do not share your personal details with anyone.