The Contested Concept of Secularism and Bangladesh

Abstract

There are different ways in which scholars comprehend secularism. According to some scholars, secularism is the phenomenon in which religion is fully separated from the state and plays no part in the public domain. Others are of the view that, while secularism denotes separation between religion and state, there should be little involvement of religion in the public domain because it is a vital part of the lives of individuals. This Article aims to discuss the various interpretations of secularism, create a classification of secularism models, and examine how secularism is considered in Bangladesh. For this purpose, this Article analyzes statements given by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (known as the Father of the Nation and the leader of the Bangladesh Awami League) to identify the secularism model followed in Bangladesh. Sheikh Mujib and his political party, the Awami League, did not explicitly use the word “secularism” until the independence war in 1971. However, secularist ideals were emphasized by the party. After independence, the Constitution of Bangladesh was adopted in 1972 and secularism was included in the Constitution. In Bangladesh, secularism is understood as the antithesis of communalism. Anti-communalism in Bangladesh does not refer to anti-religion; rather, it eliminates conflict between the various subnational communities and describes politics by giving equal status to individuals in a unified national community. President Ziaur Rahman removed the secularism principle from the Constitution in 1977 through the Fifth Amendment. Islam was declared as the state religion in 1988 during the rule of President Hussain Muhammad Ershad through the Eighth Amendment. In 2011, the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution was adopted during the tenure of Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League as Sheikh Hasina saw the necessity for following an established religion model, while making sure that sufficient rights were also awarded to religious minorities. Adopting Islam as the state religion is considered by the Awami League as a means of satisfying the Muslim majority and peacefully coexisting with religious groups such as Hefazat-e-Islam. This Article argues that the Awami League’s stance implies the practice of modus vivendi, which, in contemporary terms, signifies a means of living together for the population, in spite of their contradictory features, which emerge mostly because of difference in opinions, interests, religions, ethnicities, or beliefs. Through the practice of modus vivendi, these differences are recognized and facilitated. The meaning of secularism (and the issue of whether the state should be committed to secularism) is deeply contested in Bangladesh, making the country an interesting case study.