July Charter vs. Party Manifesto

Standing at a juncture in Bangladesh's political history, the February 12, 2026 election has not only become a struggle for power change, but also a structural conflict to repair the state. On the one hand, the 'July Charter' and the unified reform proposals of the Consensus Commission, which are composed of the desire for a July coup, on the other hand, the political parties' long-standing political philosophies and manifestos. In particular, the BNP's '31 Points' and their 'Note of Dissent' or dissent in the July Charter have given rise to a major constitutional and political debate. The question in the mind of the common voter is - will these costly reform proposals of the Consensus Commission ultimately be limited to documents? Or will the winning party implement its own manifesto in the name of the public mandate? In this great struggle for state reform, it is now the demand of the hour to analyze the gap between the promises of the manifesto and the harsh reality.

Political and constitutional analysis shows that the July Charter is essentially a document of revolutionary change, which is rumored to have been prepared on the prescription of NGOs and foreign intellectuals of Bangladeshi origin. In contrast, the BNP's 31 points are the result of their long-standing political process. According to the official website of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), although they want transparency in state reforms, they are adamant on various issues such as restoring 'full trust and faith in Allah' in the constitution. If the BNP wins this constitutional duality, it can create a major legal complication.

From a legal perspective, the manifesto that a political party takes to the people when it wins an election is the main basis for its operation. According to analysts, the Consensus Commission is not an elected body. Therefore, their proposed reforms are not legally binding until the parliament passes it. If the BNP prioritizes their 31 points, the work of the commission, which was done at a cost of thousands of crores of taka, will only find a place in the library as a reference.

BNP is talking about creating a vice-presidential post in their manifesto, which is not in the July Charter. Historically, the vice-presidential post in Bangladesh was effective during the presidential rule period. Although there are questions about its usefulness in the parliamentary system, BNP sees it as a decentralization of power. If implemented, it will add a new dimension to the constitutional framework, which may be somewhat contrary to the conventional Westminster system.

The Consensus Commission has proposed 'Proportional Representation' (PR) or proportional representation election system, which is in favor of parties including Jamaat. But BNP is in favor of seat-based elections. Scientific statistics show that even if the PR system allows small parties to enter parliament, it can create instability in government formation. As a large party, BNP considers seat-based elections to be safe to maintain their dominance.

The July Charter proposed that whoever becomes the prime minister cannot be the party head. This is a psychological call to prevent abuse of power. However, BNP is reluctant to accept it. Psychological analysis shows that in the context of Bangladesh, it is difficult to remain in the post of Prime Minister without control over the party. As a result, party interests are more likely to prevail in the battle between manifesto and reality.

The consensus commission's proposal for the formation of the upper house was to include professionals and intellectuals. BNP is considering making it seat-based. A funny reality here is that the intellectuals who formed the commission and outlined the reforms, at the end of the day, the political parties are not willing to listen to their words. As a result, a kind of cold war has started between intellectuals and politicians.

A lot of money, time and state capacity from the government's funds have been spent on running and campaigning for the consensus commission. If the elected government does not adopt these reforms, it will be a national waste. From an economic perspective, the results of research done with the people's tax money going to the dustbin is a kind of administrative failure. Organizations like Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) often question such transparency and accountability.

The 'July Charter', which was created in the blood of hundreds of people during the July Uprising, is a moral pressure. Although political parties signed it for the sake of votes, they kept the path open with a 'note of dissent' during implementation. Historically, promises made during the movement become secondary to the party agenda after coming to power.

There is a perception among the common people that the reform commissions are influenced by foreign citizens and NGO representatives. BNP has used this emotion to make it clear that they will implement the mandate of the people, not the prescription of any intellectual. This is a powerful political strategy that stirs up nationalist sentiment.

In case of changing any fundamental structure of the constitution, there is a requirement for a high court verdict and a referendum. If the winning party in the national assembly election rejects the proposal of the consensus commission, which is being held in Bangladesh, there is a possibility of filing a writ in the Supreme Court. Legally, the elected parliament has the final say, which weakens the legal basis for the commission's work.

There is a severe crisis of trust among voters. On the one hand, they want an anti-discrimination society, and on the other hand, they also know their long-established political parties. If the commission's proposals are alienated from the people, then the reforms of foreign nationals of Bangladeshi origin or the NGO-model will not be acceptable to the general public.

No proper scientific study has been made available to the general public on the percentage of people supporting the reforms that the commission has consolidated. The BNP has taken their 31 points to the people through a long-standing political program, which gives them a psychological advantage in favor of their demands.

There is a debate about how effective a bicameral parliament would be in a small and developing economy like Bangladesh. Even if the BNP wants it, they have methodological differences with the commission. The cost and administrative complexity of implementing it could pose a major challenge economically.

Here I mention 4 of the numerous results of the lack of consensus among the political parties:

Issue Consensus Commission proposal BNP position (31 points)
Religion Secular neutrality/full trust in other gods
Election system Proportional (PR) Seat-based (RC)
The Prime Minister cannot hold a party position but can be the party leader
Intellectuals nominated by the upper house Elected representatives
These differences prove that a major political conflict or disagreement may become inevitable after the elections.

The consensus commission has sent all the conditions for a referendum. If the referendum is held in a thousand ways and the party that wins the national election does not accept the results of the referendum on various pretexts and directly implements its own manifesto with a parliamentary majority, then the commission's activities will become completely meaningless. This can be considered a mockery of the system that has been in place for almost eighteen months.

Finally, I would like to say that the 2026 election is not just a routine election for Bangladesh, it is a battle between political realism and reformist ideology. The sky-high dream of reform that the consensus commission has shown is in conflict with the political parties' own agenda. Ignoring the 'note of dissent' of a big party like BNP in particular may prove to be a strategic mistake for the commission. Reform activities worth thousands of crores of taka will be worthwhile only when it reflects the aspirations of the masses, not just the philosophies of a few intellectuals. Ultimately, the winners of the street will determine the future of the state. The public should go beyond the rhetoric of both parties' manifestos and be vocal in demanding realistic reforms.


Dr. Md. Anwar Hossain is an essayist and
President of the International Anti-Drug
Organization - Freedom International
Anti-Alcohol. He can be reached at [email protected]