With four weeks to go till the day Bangladeshis head back to the polling booths, with a very large chunk doing it for the very first time, including even 30- or 35-year-olds, there seems to be a belated realisation within the political class that the general election through which we shall choose our representatives in parliament, should not make us take our eyes off the accompanying referendum, on the package of reforms that came to be known as the July Charter.

The Charter, if we recall quickly, proposes 11 major reforms, mostly in the general direction of placing limits on executive authority. For example, It limits the Treasury benches' power to bring in unilateral constitutional amendments. It has a duration limit on how long someone can serve as the head of government, or prime minister. Probably the most conspicuous proposal contained in the July Charter is the bicameral parliament i.e. two houses, by introducing an upper house, an opposition deputy speaker, limits a president's powers of pardon, and institutes a stronger balance between the powers of the president and the prime minister.

In the last few days, we have seen the interim government go into overdrive to mobilise its enormous machinery in favour of securing a win for 'Yes' in the referendum, i.e. in favour of the July Charter. The government has even recruited the banking and NGO sectors into the process, by organising workshops under Bangladesh Bank and the NGO Affairs Bureau respectively, where senior managers were provided with an SOP (standard operating procedure), if you like, on how to get colleagues, customers and clients to vote 'Yes'.

This mobilisation effort started to get on people's nerves a bit: no one wants something pushed down their throat, and here it was starting to feel like that. Eventually two very eminent legal scholars came out and opined that the IG was on shaky ground, legally, with its full-blown endorsement and campaigning, in favour of a 'Yes' vote in the referendum. Having spoken to them both, and heard Prof. Ali Riaz on the topic as well, I believe there is a fundamental discrepancy between how the respected legal scholars conceptualise the role of the interim government, as well as those recruited by it, and how they themselves saw it when they took on the role.

None of the advisers, or other high-ranking officials would ever lay claim to some mythical neutrality, that would seem to have been foisted upon them. We also know that the Constitution, as the AL left it by the end, is unable to offer us anything by way of defining the roles and responsibilities.

For now, let us recognise that if we all as a nation can pledge to keep the interest of our nation above everything else, and knowingly supported or openly participated in the movement that culminated on August 5 those riveting, monumental days of July 2024, it is incumbent upon us to vote 'Yes' in the referendum, in order to take things forward now. To keep the ball moving, as we must. Anything else would be to withdraw from the project to rebuild Bangladesh, in the middle of nowhere.