Barrister Tania Amir, daughter of the late constitutional scholar Amirul Islam, has asserted that the so-called “July Charter” possesses no constitutional standing and cannot be validated by presidential approval. In a video statement released on her verified Facebook page, she described the charter as a purely political agreement, arguing that it falls outside the formal legislative framework established by the Constitution of Bangladesh.
According to her explanation, the President has no authority to endorse or legitimise a political accord in the absence of parliamentary enactment. Under Bangladesh’s constitutional scheme, laws must be drafted and introduced in the Jatiya Sangsad (National Parliament), debated and passed by elected Members of Parliament, and, where appropriate, subject to judicial scrutiny. Only thereafter may the President grant assent and cause the legislation to be published in the official gazette. This sequence, she stressed, is not optional but is the recognised constitutional process.
Barrister Amir levelled strong criticism at Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, alleging that the party seeks to supplant the 1972 Constitution with the July Charter through political manoeuvring. She contended that the objective is to displace the foundational constitutional framework established under Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and to confer constitutional status upon a document that has not undergone legislative approval. Such an attempt, she maintained, would be inconsistent with the rule of law and incompatible with the country’s constitutional order.
She further referred to the tenure of Muhammad Yunus, noting that he took the oath of office under President Shahabuddin Ahmed in accordance with constitutional procedures. In exceptional circumstances, she observed, governments may be formed following consultation with the Chief Justice, provided the process remains within constitutional bounds. However, she firmly rejected the notion that a political agreement could be directly incorporated into the Constitution without parliamentary deliberation and approval.
To clarify her position, she outlined the recognised stages of constitutional amendment or legislative enactment:
| Stage | Constitutional Requirement |
|---|---|
| 1 | Draft bill introduced in Parliament |
| 2 | Debate and committee scrutiny |
| 3 | Passage by majority (or special majority, where required) |
| 4 | Presidential assent |
| 5 | Publication in the official gazette |
Barrister Amir argued that, should there be a compelling national reason to revisit constitutional provisions, Parliament may establish a constituent or special committee, sworn before the Speaker, to deliberate and propose amendments. Those proposals must then be tabled as a bill and adopted through a formal vote before acquiring legal force.
In closing, she warned that bypassing constitutional safeguards in favour of partisan arrangements risks institutional instability. The supremacy of Parliament and adherence to due process, she emphasised, remain the cornerstones of Bangladesh’s democratic governance.