Within minutes of National Consensus Commission (NCC) Vice Chair Ali Riaz saying on Sunday afternoon that all political parties had agreed to a maximum tenure of two terms for the prime minister, the development found top billing on most news websites.
The following day, this proposed limiting of powers of the head of government was front page news, in many instances the lead.
The reason it was such big news is that this consensus meant that the parties were now open to a reform initiative that would break from a tradition of concentrating power in the office of the prime minister.
After sending the draft of the July Charter to all political parties, the NCC urged them to commit to the long-term sustainability of the reforms.
"Matters (agreed reform recommendations) on which consensus is reached will be incorporated into the final version after the ongoing dialogue ends," Ali Riaz told the media yesterday.
What a term limit can accomplish
At the very least, a term limit will allow parties, namely the Awami League and the BNP since 1991, to move away from the unitary authority of the person who is elected prime minister.
The fact that a party will have to nominate a new leader at the end of 10 years could usher a sea change from the dynasty politics prevalent in the country since independence.
Most relevant in Bangladesh's case, ensuring that the highest executive power is not vested in one person for an unspecified term will stand as a guardrail against authoritarianism, which has cost the country dearly.
The Awami League government headed by prime minister Sheikh Hasina ruled for an unprecedented stretch of 15 years till their ouster by a popular uprising last year. In those 15 years, Hasina displayed growing authoritarian tendencies, violently crushing dissent and fostering patronage networks. Enforced disappearances of political opponents and critics had been one of the tools of repression.
It all culminated in gruesome fashion, with 1,400 civilians being killed by state forces in the July Uprising.
There were also human rights abuses, notably extrajudicial deaths in what has become known as "crossfires", when the other major party, BNP, held power in 1991-96 and 2001-2006. So, AL's ouster does not ensure that such ills will not recur.
The term limit may not be a fix-all, but what it will do is start to address the problem of executive power abuse.
A notable precedent
There is a notable precedent of a country adding a term limit long after its independence – the US in 1951.
Until that point, limiting presidential terms to a maximum of two was just a norm set by George Washington, and not a constitutional requirement. Franklin D Roosevelt won the 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944 elections before dying in office in 1945.
Concerns about executive power held for too long gave rise to the 22nd Amendment in 1951.
What lies ahead
Political parties in Bangladesh have a chequered history of keeping promises, so it is not a given that they will follow through on the consensus.
In fact, the BNP and its allies have not agreed to another proposed reform that would further dent the PM's power – barring the same person from holding the positions of party chief and prime minister.
However, the groundswell of support for change seen in the July Uprising and its aftermath has seemingly led to this unprecedented consensus on the prime minister's term limit.
Whether that political will holds, and the consequences if it doesn't, remains to be seen.
Comments