Will a bicameral parliament make Bangladesh more democratic?

As the Constitution Reform Commission prepares to submit its report to the chief adviser on Wednesday, one recommendation that is expected to make the cut is the reform of the structure of the parliament, turning it from a unicameral one to a bicameral legislature. 

Currently, the parliament of Bangladesh has one chamber, comprising 350 members, of whom 300 are from territorial constituencies, elected directly. The remaining 50 seats are reserved for women. 

Many countries use a bicameral legislative system, such as the US, the UK, India, Australia, Canada, and many more. These parliaments have a lower house which deals with day-to-day politics like UK House of Commons or the US House of Representatives, and an upper house that scrutinises and revises legislation, like the UK House of Lords or the US Senate. 

"The main objective of this change is so that there is no concentration of power, the rights of citizens are protected and no law is passed by a mere majority in any one house, which creates a kind of autocratic system in our country."

Dr Ali Riaz, head of Constitution Reform Commission

According to Dr Ali Riaz, head of the Constitution Reform Commission, stakeholders, including the political parties have vouched for a bicameral legislature, and the prime reason is they do not want to see a centralisation of power and have in its stead a kind of check and balance between the two chambers.

The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) is a strong proponent of a bicameral legislature. In fact, it was one of the party's 31-point recommendations for state reform. According to the party, through this system, it will be possible to bring balance of power in the governance of the state by utilising the knowledge and experience of experts along with the existing parliamentary structure.

"One of the reasons for this is that in the parliament we see now, the majority has done things that are not in line with the democratic aspirations of the people. And when two-thirds of a party is in the parliament, the constitution has been amended in ways that are harmful to democracy and human rights. We have seen such instances during the 4th amendment and 15th amendments," Dr Ali Riaz said. 

"So the main objective of this change is so that there is no concentration of power, the rights of citizens are protected and no law is passed by a mere majority in any one house, which creates a kind of autocratic system in our country," he added.

According to the draft proposal, as reported by Prothom Alo, there will be a total of 505 seats in the two chambers of the Parliament.

The lower chamber of Parliament will have 400 seats and elections will be held in the current system. Out of this, 100 seats will be reserved for women. The members of the lower house will be elected by direct vote, in the current election system. 

There will be 105 seats in the upper house and the members of this house will be elected on a proportional basis. 

How would Bangladesh's upper house work?

While all lower houses in democracies around the world share broadly similar functions and are elected with an equal as possible ratio of voters to representatives across the country, the same is not true of upper houses. 

Not only do they vary in terms of powers and functions, from the powerful senates of Italy or the US, to the weak and overridable UK House of Lords or Austrian Federal Council, but the methods by which they are chosen also differ.

"In the US, the members are elected by equal representation regardless of the population of the states. Australia, Spain and Switzerland have followed this system," said Dr Qazi Zahed Iqbal, lawyer at the Supreme Court of Bangladesh and HRID Legal and Human Rights Adviser.

This is designed to give less populous units a stronger voice and prevent their interests from being overridden by more populous areas. But 'territorial representation' can be done by other means. The Italian Senate is focused on regional representation, but it is done in proportion to population.

"But for a unitary country like Bangladesh, you will have to set some other criteria. It can be an intellectual criteria, you can take people from different segments. Also, the members can be selected by the proportion of the lower chamber seats, or by the ratio or proportion of the vote they received," he added. 

The representation could have two systems. 

Upper chamber representation could be selected by the representation of the lower chamber, in proportion to the seats. In that case, the proportional representation in the upper chamber would be low.  

Or, the system could be based on the ratio of votes, what we call a proportional representation, i.e., each representative is elected by a roughly equal number of voters. 

In the current parliamentary election system of Bangladesh, political parties participate in the election by assigning separate candidates to 300 seats. Let's say, in the current system, a total of four candidates from four parties are contesting for a seat in the national elections and 85% of people vote in this election. Among them, the first, second and third candidates receive 20% votes. And the fourth candidate receives 25% votes.

According to the current system, only the fourth candidate will be elected as an MP from this seat. And the 60% votes of those three parties are of no use. In the proportional representation system, the parties can participate in the parliament, even if they lose majority seats. 

However, this is where eminent jurist Dr Shahdeen Malik raises an important question. 

"If you are electing the lower chamber members by a direct election system, but the upper chamber members are elected through proportional representation, how are you going to ensure equality? It is going to be the same. If the majority seat winners of the lower chamber members will choose the upper chamber members, isn't there a risk of one party majority in both chambers?" he asked.  

Here, Dr Zahed suggests a traditional election system for the lower chamber while a proportional ratio of vote-based selection in the upper chamber, which sounds a bit complicated. This is why he believes that converting a country governed by a unicameral legislature like Bangladesh to a bicameral legislature will require constitutional, political, and legal reforms simultaneously. 

"Until there is reform in the political parties and in the election commission system, changing the constitutional structure is not going to stop tyranny of the majority in the parliament," he said. 

How relevant is this system for Bangladesh?

Dr Zahed Iqbal says that there is no hard and fast rule on whether a particular country can have a bicameral parliament or not. 

"Generally, we see that federal countries like the United States and India have adopted a bicameral system. However, India's parliament is not performing very well. On the other hand, England, being a unitary country, has two chambers. Bangladesh can have a two-chamber parliament, but in that case, the criteria of choosing the members can be different," he said. 

The experiences of other countries with bicameral parliaments are different. "While it is working well in some places, in some places, it is causing problems. We have to consider why we are doing it, and how we are going to do it. We are considering both sides," Dr Ali Riaz said. 

Dr Shahdeen Malik believes otherwise. 

"Last month, when we filed the court hearings, we found 4,100 cases that used references from the constitution. Every day, hundreds of cases use constitutional references. When you bring any change to the constitution itself, what will happen to these cases? Are we going to drop them?" he asked.  

He believes writing a rule or bringing a change on paper and establishing that in reality are two different things. "It will take our political leaders, lawyers and legal practitioners 20 years to understand these. Reform takes time."  

Dr Ali Riaz provided an answer though. "In the past we have introduced many new things in the system — when we introduced the interim government in the 1990s, it was new for us and it was needed in our changed political scenario. Because at the end of the day, a constitution is supposed to serve the people of the country," he added.