STAFF CORRESPONDENT

Calling the July charter implementation order “a document of endless deceit and national betrayal”, the treasury bench yesterday proposed forming an all-party special parliamentary committee to amend the constitution.

In response, opposition leader Shafiqur Rahman proposed a separate special parliamentary committee to convene the Constitution Reform Council. “But our appeal is that the committee should have an equal number of members from both sides, so that we can present our views properly.”

The opposition argued that the July National Charter (Constitutional Reform) Implementation Order, 2025 was legal and that all should respect the mandate of the referendum and the spirit of the July charter.

The lawmakers were participating in a discussion on an adjournment motion brought by the opposition leader, calling for convening] the Constitution Reform Council in accordance with the July charter implementation order.

The debate ended without any resolution.

According to the order, the first session of the council should be convened in the same manner as the first session of parliament -- within 30 calendar days of the election results being declared.

However, this has not yet been done.

Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed said the July charter implementation order was “void ab initio” (invalid from the beginning), adding that between March 26, 1971 and April 7, 1973, the president had the authority to issue such orders, but after the formation of the first parliament in 1973, that power no longer existed.

He noted that 133 ordinances were placed before parliament, but the July charter implementation order was not among them, because it was neither an ordinance nor a law.

He also described the order as “a document of endless deception by the interim government” and “a document of national betrayal”, adding that he had asked the president whether such an order could be issued. “The president replied, ‘I cannot, but I am being forced to,’” he said.

Salahuddin then asked, “Under which provision can the president convene a session of the Constitution Reform Council?” He added that the question of an oath would arise only if the constitution had been amended,

SEE PAGE 2 COL 1