FROM PAGE 1

BNP has already sounded a warning that it would reject anything beyond the charter, clarifying that the notes of dissent must not be done away with.

The two other prominent parties -- Jamaat-e-Islami and NCP -- favour excluding the dissenting notes from the referendum.

The July National Charter mentions that it would be up to the discretion of the parties, if they won the people’s mandate, whether to act on their notes of dissent.

However, when submitting its recommendations for the implementation, the consensus commission dropped the dissenting notes.

During the consensus talks, BNP registered notes of dissent on at least nine issues; there were more than 25 dissenting notes from other parties.

BNP leader Salahuddin Ahmed has said the charter was signed at a historic event and includes some notes of dissent from different political parties.

“We still stand by that position and have not deviated from the signed charter,” he said.

In its recommendations regarding the charter implementation, the consensus commission pitched two alternatives for the referendum question. Both ask essentially the same question -- whether voters agree to 48 proposals that deal with constitutional changes.

However, none of those proposals had any mention of the notes of dissent.

When asked why the notes of dissent had been dropped, commission member Badiul Alam Majumdar told this newspaper yesterday that during the discussions, there were views both for and against the issues. However, the decision was made to go with the overwhelming majority.

“Notes of dissent were included in the July charter to keep the records straight. But at the time of the referendum, only the decisions must be presented before the people,” he explained.

BNP’S DISSENT

BNP and its allies dissented to a proposal for an upper house based on proportional representation of votes. Instead, they supported forming the upper house according to each party’s share of seats in the lower house.

While most parties agreed that the constitution could be amended through a two-thirds majority in the lower house and a simple majority in the upper house, BNP was against it, saying that the upper house need not vote on it since the representatives were not directly elected.

The parties, except BNP and its allies, agreed that a party chief should not be eligible to serve as prime minister at the same time.

Most of the parties have agreed that lawmakers be allowed to vote across party lines, except on no-confidence motions and finance bills. BNP’s note of dissent on this point adds that the exception extends to national security during war and constitutional amendments.

According to the July charter, a five-member panel comprising the prime minister, the leader of the opposition, the speaker (the lower house) and the deputy speaker (from the opposition), and a representative of the second-largest opposition party will be formed to pick chief adviser, of a caretaker government, from a pool of nominees.

The panel will invite parties with representation in parliament as well as those registered with the EC, and independent MPs to propose names of individuals qualified to serve as chief adviser. Each party and independent MP may propose one name.

The panel will deliberate on the proposed individuals through its own enquiries. From among eligible citizens, one individual will be selected as chief adviser of the caretaker government.

If this first option fails, both the ruling party and the opposition will put forward five nominees each. The second-largest opposition party will put forward two.

The ruling party will select one from the main opposition’s list, and vice versa. The two parties will also pick one nominee from the second-largest party’s list. At this point, four out of five panel votes will suffice to select a chief adviser from the short list.

If the second option also fails, two judges -- one from the Appellate Division and one from the High Court Division -- will join the panel. The seven-member panel will then vote on the shortlisted nominees to select the chief adviser.

Several parties, including BNP, submitted notes of dissent on the inclusion of two judges and the voting option.

A majority of the parties agreed that the president should have the authority to appoint the chiefs of National Human Rights Commission, the Information Commission, Bangladesh Press Council, Law Commission, and Bangladesh Energy Regulatory Commission and the governor of Bangladesh Bank.

BNP objected in the case of the energy regulatory commission and the head of the central bank.

Parties also agreed that the most senior judge of the Appellate Division, based on their service duration, be appointed the chief justice.

BNP dissented, saying that its election manifesto will include the option of appointing one of the two most senior judges.

It also issued a note of dissent on the process of appointing the ombudsman and public service commission and the comptroller and auditor general.

The party has said, on several occasions, that appointments to these vital institutions be regulated by law.

ORDER AND REFERENDUM

Both Jamaat and NCP favour an implementation order to grant the charter a legal recognition. And the NCP specifically wants the chief adviser, not the president, to issue it.

BNP opposes a constitutional order for implementation of the charter.

On the referendum timing, the party insists it should be held on the same day as the national election, while Jamaat is demanding that it be held before the polls.

Jamaat, along with several like-minded parties, has already launched street protests calling for the referendum to be held in November.