Few observations-
A. Key Factors-
1. There are at least 4 advisors who have expertise in law. Yes, their area of specialisation varies, but they do understand the legal structure and framework;
2. Two of the other advisors have clear understanding about the electoral process and know how the election commission functions- one as a commissioner and the other as an observer;
3. At least two advisors have expertise in foreign policy and the Chief Advisor also has strong connection with foreign leaders of other countries;
4. The government has also included several economists which indicates that the concern about the economy is real and there will be plans to fix it;
5. The inclusion of ex Nayeb-e-Amir of Hefajot will definitely raise some eyebrows but an interesting choice;
6. Representation of civil society groups, especially the ones that deal with human rights, environmental issues is an important feature. Fear of NGOisation is there but it’s still significant.
7. And of course, the inclusion of the 2 coordinators of the movement!
B. What it may mean (being optimistic)
1. The constitutional and institutional reform is a real possibility. We need to keep pushing.
2. The inclusion of foreign policy and economic experts indicate that the government’s two major challenges will be- managing the economy, ensuring financial stability and rebuilding/ redesigning relationship with neighbours and other countries;
3. At the same time, significant changes in the electoral system is likely (which may contribute to overall balance of power by preventing centralisation).
4. The civic space that has shrunk over the years will likely expand…opportunities for think tanks, research organisations to contribute and human rights organisations to claim their place.
5. Like it or not, Hefajot has a large following and a stake in the political process. Their exclusion could result into a chaotic situation if there is an indeed a reform of the political structure and their voices are not heard. However, if their inclusion in the advisory panel is an indication that the state is willing to negotiate, then to make inclusion effective, the Hefajot will also need to compromise. Otherwise it won’t work. The role of the students, citizens and CSOs role will be important in preventing the dominance of dogma-driven politics;
6. The two coordinators can play an important role if they keep pushing for the demands raised by the students. They represent the students and their aspirations and for them the cost of ignoring/ forgetting that demand is too high (if past experiences are considered). And , their commitment can play a huge role.
C. Concerns/ Questions
1. Making or amending a constitution is not only legal but it is a political process. Would have been better if they could include seasoned political science experts. I am sure that they would seek help and reach out to the outside experts. Key questions that need to be answered –
– How can we prevent or deal with centralisation of power (by one person or one branch)?
– How can we design a check and balance mechanism?
– Related to the earlier point, what type of parliamentary/ representative system and electoral mechanism should we adopt that would ensure the maximum representation (of the mass)?
– How can the local government be linked/ delinked with/ from the central government so that their independent functioning is ensured?
– How can we redesign the institutions of accountability so that they can be both autonomous and relevant? In the context of Bangladesh, how can we find the balance between autonomy and relevance?
2. Surprised to see no public administration experts or senior Ex- bureaucrats. Determining the most efffective role for a well functioning bureaucracy within a civil service is still a complicated question where relationship between the political actors and the civil servants need to be redefined. Again, probably outside help will be arranged.
3. How to address the concern of ‘NGOisation’ expressed by few?
4. Considering the inclusion of Hefajot (and a surprising exclusion of the left including the progressive/ liberal part), how far the government will be willing to go to create an enabling environment (for the future) for the Human Rughts organisation?
5. Since the question is to develop a ‘inclusive’ society, how broad the definition of ‘inclusion’ will be? How far will the constitution go in protecting the rights of religious, ethnic minorities and the rights of other political groups , civil society to express their opinion/ point of views? To what extent will the constitution support pluralism?
Let’s wait and see.
✍️ Dr. Asif M Shahan
Advisor, Youth Policy Forum – YPF