Commentary

1. Background

The mass uprising of August 5, 2024, was not merely a political event—it symbolized a demand for a fundamental transformation of the state system. One of its key demands was the formulation of a “July Charter”, envisioned as a nationally agreed framework to guide the country’s governance in the post-uprising era.
The purpose of the National Consensus Commission was to bring political parties to the same table and ensure that constitutional reform, elections, and state restructuring would be conducted on the basis of this charter. Supporters of the movement believed that the July Charter would become the largest political agreement since independence.

—

2. Expectations vs. Reality

Initially, the public was assured that—

The National Consensus Commission would formulate the July Charter through consensus among political parties.

A new constitution would be drafted based on this charter.

All reforms, elections, and administrative restructuring would follow the principles laid out in the charter.

However, after August 5, reality took a different turn—

On that day, the Chief Adviser unexpectedly read out the “July Declaration”, a separate and controversial document, bypassing the charter altogether.

That very night, he announced that the next national election would be held in February 2026.

Since then, the National Consensus Commission has remained completely silent on the July Charter.

—

3. Signs of a Shift

This behavior raises serious questions and concerns—

1. The Intention Behind Bypassing the Charter

Isn’t announcing an election without the July Charter effectively dismantling the core vision of the uprising?

Does this not amount to abandoning the pledge to restructure the state after the movement?

2. Crisis of Public Trust

The commission’s silence has fueled suspicions that the entire consensus process was merely a delaying tactic to secure political positioning.

3. A Strategy of Political Division

While the BNP remains the only major party resisting this trap, the move could be used to deepen political divisions in the future.

—

4. Possible Implications

Erosion of the Uprising’s Spirit
An election without the charter means losing the central goals of reform, accountability, and balance of power.

Collapse of Public Confidence
The sacrifices made by those who gave their lives in the movement risk being reduced to a bargaining chip in political games.

New Political Instability
If elections are held without the charter, the winner—whoever it may be—will face questions of legitimacy, potentially triggering new waves of conflict.

—

5. Conclusion

Pushing forward with elections without the “July Charter” is not just a procedural shift—it is an open declaration of retreat from the central agreement of the mass uprising. In doing so, the Chief Adviser and the National Consensus Commission appear to be taking a political path that runs counter to public expectations and may be recorded in history as a form of deception.

The minimum condition for the state should be that reform and elections are grounded in the charter written in the blood of the mass uprising.
Otherwise, the victory of August 5 will be reduced to nothing more than a date on the calendar, leaving the people without any tangible dream of lasting change.

—