Rifts over referendum, national election put nation in crisis

In recent months, Bangladesh has stood at a crossroads in its democratic evolution. "After the publication of a far-reaching document of reform proposals, the" "July National Charter 2025" "(later the" "July Charter" "), a fundamental question for the nation has come into sharp focus: should the people be asked to vote by direct referendum to approve these changes, or should the next national election be the main vehicle for people's sovereignty?" "This question is not only procedural, but it is at the core of the citizen-state relationship, the" "citizen's charter of freedom," "and it is involved in deciding whether the democratic trajectory of Bangladesh will truly reflect the will of the people, or only the outcome of elitist negotiations." We will use the lens of group theory in public policy and political science to show how competing interest groups, social segments, and institutional actors are shaping this dilemma - and why the choice between referendum and election has profound implications for legitimacy, representation, and accountability.

 

 

According to a recent analysis, it has been found that half of the 84 proposed reforms cannot be implemented unless the constitution is amended.

 

 

But the country's experience shows that large-scale national elections are always fraught with challenges - mutual distrust between the major political parties, concerns about the fairness of elections, weak party institutionalization, and the influence of the elite - which is clearly documented in the study of Bangladeshi politics.

 

 

As the current transitional government and the National Consensus Commission decide whether the referendum will be held before or on the same day as the upcoming national elections, the key question arises: What is the appropriate method to gain popular support or legitimacy?

 

 

Some political parties insist that the referendum must be held before the election to establish the legitimacy of the reforms. On the other hand, other parties argue that holding elections and referendums on the same day would save both cost and time and reduce voter fatigue.

 

 

Basically, this decision between the referendum and the election is a question of choosing the appropriate means to express the voice of the people. Whether the people will approve or reject the July Charter by direct vote, or will they indirectly approve or reject the reform package by participating in the parliamentary elections through party competition - that is the most important democratic question before the nation now.

 

 

To deepen understanding of this dilemma, we turn to 'group theory' in the public policy tradition. Group theory holds that policy outcomes are essentially the product of continuous interactions among interest groups, social organizations, and institutional actors, each seeking to influence decision-making to reflect their own interests. According to the Institute for Public Administration (2023), "Group theory posits that public policies are the result of continuous interactions among various interest groups."

 

 

In the context of Bangladesh, this conflict of referendum versus election can be characterized as a struggle between different competing groups. These groups include major political parties, reform-oriented civil society networks, institutional entities (such as the Election Commission, the judiciary, the bureaucracy), and "citizen" groups - that is, ordinary voters. Each of these groups has distinct objectives, resources, and strategic preferences. For example:

 

 

Political parties view the referendum from the perspective of their own electoral interests - where it can limit party control, elections maintain their influence. Civil society supports the referendum, as it gives citizens the opportunity to express themselves directly. Institutional organizations focus on cost, time, and technical complexity, while citizens react to the ease or fatigue of participation. According to group theory, the distribution of power is uneven - organized parties and elite networks are relatively strong, while reformist groups are weak. As a result, the decision between referendum and election is not only procedural; it determines whether a party-party elite or citizen-led reformist-democracy will prevail.

 

 

The concept of the Charter of the Freedom of the Citizen is essentially a symbol of an indissoluble social and political contract between the state and the people - in which the citizens have the right to determine the constitutional and democratic structure of their governance. If the process of implementing this agreement is determined in a way that increases the influence of the elite, ignores the direct opinion of citizens or weakens the basis of legitimacy, then this charter of independence is threatened in a real sense.

 

 

If national elections are adopted as the only method, the ratification of the reform charter will occur through party victory, not through citizen consent. This will strengthen the power of political parties and influential groups, and the opinion of ordinary citizens will become indirect.

 

 

On the other hand, an independent referendum - either before or in parallel with an election - is a direct reflection of civil sovereignty. In this, the people can directly vote for or against the reform charter, which can establish the legitimacy of the state in a new way. However, there are also some risks - the complexity of the question, the dominance of the majority or the confusion of the voters can undermine legitimacy.

 

 

In the light of group theory, the referendum can increase citizen participation and the active role of civil society, whereas the electoral system rather retains the power of established political groups and elite networks. Referendums, therefore, have the potential to strengthen the charter of civil liberties, and only limit the electoral process.

 

 

Policymakers must balance legitimacy and practical complexity in the conduct of the referendum. Poor implementation can lead to a crisis of trust, and simultaneous vote fatigue and low participation. Referendums can blur the boundaries of reform with issue-based divisions, elite influence, and political competition, thereby weakening the transparency and democratic legitimacy of citizen opinion.

 

 

Given the significance of the issue, a coordinated approach is recommended for Bangladesh: A referendum on the July Charter should be conducted through a separate ballot on the same day as the national election (or at least within a short interval). This choice is intended to bring about a balance between legitimacy and practicality - where legitimacy is achieved through citizen consent and practicality is ensured through technical management of elections.

 

 

From the point of view of group theory, this approach is designed to reduce the dominance of the party apparatus in the charter question as well as to exploit the dynamics of the election to ensure voter turnout.In this situation, the essential design precautions listed below must be included:
To ensure a fair referendum, Bangladesh needs to formulate simple and clear questions, set up an impartial election commission and raise citizen awareness. The charter approved by the legal system should be made mandatory, and citizen participation and democratic integrity should be protected by preventing political or elite influence through strict supervision.

 

 

Deciding between the referendum and the national election in Bangladesh will determine whose interests will prevail. In group theory, this would ensure the benefit of either established political parties, or citizen-centered reform networks. If the right decision is made, the July Charter will strengthen the citizen-state social contract, and if it is wrong, the risk of elite influence and artificial democracy will increase.

 

 

Afroza Akter, Lecture, Department of English, Bangladesh University of Business and Technology (BUBT) and Md. Anwar Hossen , Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Bangladesh University of Business and Technology. (BUBT)