Amid widespread allegations of coercion and state-sponsored pressure, Bangladesh’s interim government is aggressively mobilising public servants, banks, insurance companies, NGOs, and even private businesses to campaign for a “Yes” vote in the February 12 referendum on the July National Charter.
Critics warn that the exercise not only violates the neutrality expected of a caretaker administration but is fundamentally illegal and unconstitutional, with no provision for such a plebiscite in the existing 1972 Constitution.
The referendum’s legality and fairness remain deeply contested, raising serious questions about the interim government’s commitment to democratic principles.
The Chief Adviser’s Office, ministries, and field administration have issued directives—including office orders—requiring government offices from secretariat to union level to actively promote “Yes” votes, media reports say. Prime Minister Muhammad Yunus himself appealed in a January 19 televised address: “The key to building a new Bangladesh is now in your hands. Stamp ‘Yes’… Encourage everyone you know… Change the country.” Government leaflets and verified social media posts list 11 supposed benefits of “Yes,” while ominously warning that “No” yields “nothing.”
Bank executives, speaking anonymously, revealed they feel compelled to comply out of fear of being labelled “fascist collaborators” or facing mob violence, vandalism, or worse. Talking to the media, one managing director of a state-owned bank admitted: “We are following government directives to avoid any risk to our lives and property.”
RAB member killed in Sitakunda armed attack amid state-sponsored mobocracy
Betraying Democracy: Yunus-Jamaat clique’s shameful push for rigged referendum
Yunus’ referendum is an ominous sign for Bangladesh, warns Masuda Bhatti
A private bank GM echoed: “If we stay neutral or oppose, we could be branded fascists—then anything can happen: mob attack, extortion, even loss of life.” Similar pressure is visible in markets, where traders hang “Yes” banners to protect their investments from potential reprisals.
Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) Executive Director Iftekharuzzaman cautioned that while the government may argue it has a mandate for reform, it must not impose its position on citizens. “The government’s role should be to inform people impartially about both ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ outcomes, not to pressure them,” he said. “Forcing banks, NGOs, or officials to campaign crosses a line.”
The Election Commission has offered a tepid response. Commissioner Abdur Rahman Mashud stated he sees no major issue with the government promoting its own proposal, adding: “If the government says it, it can say it.” He suggested other public bodies should remain silent. Another commissioner declined to comment.
Legal and political analysts argue that the referendum itself is extra-constitutional. The 1972 Constitution provides no mechanism for a direct plebiscite of this nature, and sweeping changes—bundled into four questions that effectively demand approval of the entire 84-clause July Charter—bypass the required two-thirds parliamentary approval for amendments. Critics describe the process as a one-sided imposition designed to retroactively legitimise the August 5, 2024, takeover and indemnify participants in July’s violent uprising.
With state resources funding a relentless “Yes” drive while dissenting voices face intimidation, many fear the February 12 vote will not reflect genuine public will but rather manufactured consent under duress. As one anonymous official put it: “People are being forced to choose ‘Yes’ to survive—not because they believe in it.”
Bengali 
English