BNP had backed the idea of strengthening the president’s powers during the interim government’s tenure, but the party now appears reluctant to pursue such reforms. Its 31-point charter also contains no specific commitment on the issue, with senior leaders saying there is little scope for major changes.
Since Bangladesh restored the parliamentary system in 1991, the president has exercised most powers on the advice of the prime minister. Even presidential speeches are largely prepared by the government. Critics argue that constitutional provisions have concentrated excessive authority in the hands of the prime minister.
The president, however, remains the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, though the defence ministry is controlled by the prime minister.
Following the July uprising, the National Consensus Commission discussed creating a balance between the powers of the prime minister and the president. BNP representative and current Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed proposed amending Article 48(3) of the Constitution on presidential powers, but the proposal lacked details.
BNP’s election manifesto does not mention expanding presidential powers. Its 31-point charter only refers to balancing the executive authority of the prime minister and the cabinet.
The Jamaat-e-Islami-led opposition alliance did not join BNP’s special committee on constitutional reform. At meetings held without opposition participation, the issue of presidential powers did not come up for discussion.
TIMES of Bangladesh spoke to several BNP Standing Committee members, all of whom said they saw no practical scope for increasing presidential authority.
“The president is a respected figure and the highest policy authority of the state. At this stage of life, there is nothing left for him to seek or achieve. In that case, is there any need to amend the Constitution to increase his powers?” said one BNP leader.
Another leader said, “The presidential system was changed because it had failed in the past. The president should now perform duties according to the prime minister’s advice.”
BNP puts ball in opposition’s court
Salahuddin Ahmed, now the home minister and BNP representative at the National Consensus Commission at the time, was asked what powers the party wanted to grant the president.
He shifted responsibility to the opposition, saying, “If the opposition participates in discussions on constitutional amendments and reaches consensus, the issue can be taken forward.”
“BNP does not support any rushed decision. Rather, it wants to establish a sustainable constitutional system based on the views of all political parties,” he said.
Jamaat’s proposal on the issue remains unclear. National Citizen Party (NCP) has called for breaking excessive concentration of power and establishing an effective system of checks and balances among the president, prime minister and parliament.
However, it also believes the president may have some independent constitutional powers, provided they are not used as an alternative source of executive authority.
Chief Whip Nurul Islam Moni told TIMES, “But the opposition did not respond to the government’s call. As a result, discussions on the issue did not move forward.”
What powers does the president have?
Article 48(3) of the Constitution states that, except for appointing the prime minister under Article 56(3) and the chief justice under Article 95(1), the president must act according to the prime minister’s advice.
The Constitution also prevents courts from questioning whether the prime minister has provided advice to the president or what that advice was.
Under Article 56(3), the president appoints as prime minister the lawmaker who appears to command the confidence of the majority in parliament.
In the first election after the return to parliamentary rule in 1991, BNP won 140 seats while the Awami League secured 88. After Jamaat, which had won 18 seats, extended support to BNP, there was little uncertainty over the stability of Khaleda Zia’s government.
Since then, every ruling party has secured more than 151 seats in elections.
Article 95(1) states that the president appoints the chief justice and other judges after consultation with the chief justice. However, questions have long remained over whether presidents can act independently of the government in judicial appointments.
The power to return bills
The president has one significant constitutional power that has been exercised only twice.
Under Article 80, the president can return any bill other than a money bill to parliament within 15 days, requesting reconsideration or amendments. If no action is taken within that period, the bill is considered approved.
Both attempts to return bills ended without success.
In 1998, during the Awami League government, then president Shahabuddin Ahmed returned the Public Security Bill to parliament.
The bill included provisions to deny bail to accused persons and allow the detention of suspected “enemies of the state” for up to 90 days without a specific warrant or reason. Critics at the time warned that the law could be used to suppress political opponents.
After the president returned the bill, parliament amended it and passed the Public Security (Special Provisions) Act in 2000. The BNP-led four-party alliance government repealed the law in 2002.
On 20 November 2023, then president Mohammed Sahabuddin returned the Bangladesh Labour (Amendment) Bill without signing it.
A provision of the bill proposed increasing punishment for illegal strikes by workers. Amid concerns over international criticism, parliament did not proceed with the bill after it was returned.
How much power do presidents have elsewhere?
India’s Constitution does not set a deadline for presidential action on a bill. A president can keep a bill pending indefinitely without approving or rejecting it, a practice known as a “pocket veto”.
In 1986, then president Giani Zail Singh used this power by withholding assent to the Indian Post Office (Amendment) Bill passed by Rajiv Gandhi’s government.
The bill would have allowed authorities to intercept, open and censor citizens’ letters and parcels.
It remained pending until Singh’s term ended in 1987. His successor R Venkataraman also did not sign it. In 1999, the Vajpayee government withdrew the bill.
Pakistan’s president once had the power to dissolve parliament and dismiss the prime minister without advice if he believed the country faced a constitutional crisis.
That provision was used to dismiss the governments of Muhammad Khan Junejo in 1988, Benazir Bhutto in 1990 and Nawaz Sharif in 1993.
Pakistan’s parliament abolished Article 58(2)(b) in 2010, making the presidency largely ceremonial.
Singapore’s president has limited discretionary veto powers. The president can block government attempts to use national reserves and independently review certain key appointments, including the chief justice, central bank governor and anti-corruption chief.
In Italy, the president can reject ministerial appointments. In 2018, the president blocked the appointment of a Eurosceptic economist as finance minister.
The Italian president can also return legislation to parliament with objections and recommendations, a move lawmakers rarely ignore.
