Dhaka: Parliament experienced intense debate before scheduling March 31 to discuss the July National Charter (Constitution Reform) Implementation Order, 2025, following an adjournment motion placed by Opposition Leader Dr. Shafiqur Rahman.
According to United News of Bangladesh, Dr. Rahman, who leads Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, submitted an adjournment motion under Section 62 of the Rules of Procedure. The motion sought to adjourn the House’s business to discuss the summoning of the Constitution Reform Council session in line with the July National Charter Implementation Order. Dr. Rahman emphasized that the public had endorsed the order, with 70 percent voting for it in the February 12 referendum coinciding with the 13th parliamentary election. He noted that the elected MPs are obliged to take oaths as members of both Parliament and the Constitution Reform Council, yet BNP-led alliance MPs have not taken the oath, unlike 77 MPs from the Jamaat-led alliance.
Dr. Rahman highlighted the absence of the Constitution Reform Council’s session, which Article 10 of the July National Charter Implementation Order mandates to be summoned within 30 days post-election results. He urged the Speaker to prioritize an adjournment motion for public discussion on the matter, emphasizing its significance.
In response, Law Minister Md Asaduzzaman acknowledged the motion as rational and timely, advocating for a discussion involving all sides to address the national confusion surrounding the July National Charter. The Deputy Speaker, Barrister Kayser Kamal, subsequently scheduled a two-hour discussion on March 31 as the day’s final agenda.
Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed, addressing parliamentary procedure, noted the need for adherence to rules when discussing constitutional reform proposals. He suggested forming an all-party constitutional committee to reach consensus and emphasized that constitutional reform requires legislative action, not an adjournment motion.
Ahmed further clarified that while he did not oppose the proposal, procedural validity was essential. He recommended that the opposition utilize Rule 68 for a two-hour discussion, as Rule 62 does not apply to legislative matters. His remarks sparked protests from opposition members, prompting the Speaker to maintain order in the House.
The Home Minister reiterated the importance of constitutional amendments arising through proper legislative processes and broad national consensus, warning against simplistic voting methods. He urged for amendments that reflect public aspirations and the spirit of the July uprising.
During the session, the opposition leader sought clarification from the Speaker on reopening discussions after a ruling, but the Deputy Speaker maintained that his decision had been made.