Constitutional Legitimacy in Crisis: Interim Governance and Executive Ordinances in Bangladesh

Abstract

In Bangladesh, constitutional continuity is upheld through the framework ensured by Article 7 of the Constitution of Bangladesh, which establishes the supremacy of the Constitution. The exercise of executive powers in times of political crisis raises questions about constitutional legitimacy, especially in the absence of a functioning Prime Minister. Article 48(3) of the Constitution mandates that the President act in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, but when this position is vacant, uncertainty arises regarding the authority of the President to make decisions. The power to issue executive ordinances under Article 93 further complicates the issue of governance during such interim periods. While this provision grants the President the authority to legislate in the absence of Parliament, it is constrained by the necessity of maintaining constitutional principles and avoiding infringement on the basic structure of the Constitution. In times of political paralysis, the use of ordinances must be justified within the framework of constitutional interpretation that prioritizes continuity over strict interpretations of the text. This study asserts that the legitimacy of executive ordinances in Bangladesh’s interim governance context is grounded in constitutional principles, judicial observation, jurisprudential principles, international practice, and principles. These principles not only guide judicial reasoning but also serve as a framework for ensuring governance remains functional, transparent, and ultimately directed toward the restoration of representative democracy.