An editorial titled “BNP’s Dissent Notes Signal Persistent Traditions” published on October 29, 2025, in The Daily Star, has garnered attention. While acknowledging the author’s efforts, it might be misconstrued that BNP is outrightly against the interim government’s state reforms. In reality, the party has submitted dissent notes on certain proposals within the July National Charter that it views as exaggerated and open to amendments according to BNP’s terms. BNP intends to incorporate its complete reform proposals in its election manifesto to allow voters to comprehend the scope of the reform package and cast their judgment. Hence, the notion that BNP is clinging to “old habits” may not be entirely valid.
The article discusses four key issues to support its argument about BNP. It would have been beneficial if the author had also presented the party’s rationale behind its decisions. Here, we outline BNP’s stance on these four issues.
BNP had suggested establishing an upper house to enhance national governance by leveraging the expertise of seasoned citizens, following a proportional seat allocation from the lower house. However, the party opposes creating an upper house through proportional representation (PR) based on the national vote share, citing concerns that this approach could be exploited as a political tool. Additionally, BNP believes that a PR-based upper chamber could hinder the lower chamber’s functions, creating unnecessary delays.
Regarding the tenure of the Prime Minister, BNP supports capping an individual’s term as the Prime Minister at a maximum of 10 years but expresses reservations about the proposed National Constitutional Council (NCC). BNP fears that the NCC could disrupt executive power irregularly and diminish the Prime Minister’s authority, posing risks to democratic norms. BNP advocates for reforms in existing laws governing the appointment of constitutional bodies to ensure transparency and accountability.
BNP argues against the formation of the National Constitutional Council (NCC), contending that it could undermine the Prime Minister’s powers and impede the functionality of institutions like the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) and the judiciary, affecting the rule of law.
Regarding Article 70, BNP proposes granting MPs the autonomy to vote independently, except on critical matters like national security, fiscal legislation, no-confidence motions, and constitutional amendments. BNP believes that the proposed amendment in the July charter could overpower the opposition, leading to an unstable government, which would burden the nation.
BNP has signified its compliance with the government’s proposals by endorsing the charter. However, the party emphasizes resolving the February election issue as a top priority to elect a government committed to upholding the charter’s provisions, including significant constitutional aspects. BNP has accepted the government’s initiative for a referendum on the July National Charter and pledged to implement the charter if elected to power, aligning with its 31-point reform agenda.
The pressing need for a credible election, crucial for the country’s progress, has been delayed, resulting in economic and social stagnation, to the detriment of the populace. A survey by Innovision Consulting in February 2025 revealed that 58.1% of voters advocate for the next national election before the year-end, indicating a strong public desire for timely elections. It is imperative not to misconstrue BNP as anti-reformist solely advocating for elections, as a democratic transition facilitated by a credible electoral process is paramount for the nation’s stability.
BNP remains steadfast in its commitment to implementing the July National Charter and fulfilling its comprehensive 31-point agenda, reflecting its historical dedication to democratic governance and public welfare. The party’s track record indicates a persistent dedication to serving the populace, showcasing its enduring commitment to beneficial societal practices.
The article concludes by emphasizing the author’s credentials and affiliations, reiterating that the expressed views are solely the author’s perspective.