Weekly Bangla Mirror | Bangla Mirror, Bangladeshi news in UK, bangla mirror news
By Advocate Shafiqul Haque:
A Foreign Passport, a Bangladeshi Heart: Is a New Constitutional Path for Dual Citizens Now a Matter of Time?
Bangladesh’s debate over citizenship is not new. Yet during national elections, changes of government and periods of major political transition, questions surrounding citizenship naturally receive renewed public attention.
In recent times, questions concerning foreign citizenship, dual citizenship and the constitutional eligibility of individuals to hold important public offices have once again entered the national conversation.
But if this debate is viewed merely as a dispute involving particular individuals or political parties, we risk missing the larger issue.
The real question before Bangladesh is much bigger:
If a person is Bangladeshi by birth or descent but also holds the citizenship of another country, should that person automatically be prevented from serving Bangladesh in Parliament, in the Cabinet, or in other important constitutional positions?
In my view, the time has come for Bangladesh to reconsider this question.
The issue should not be approached simply as a question of whether someone possesses a foreign passport. It should be approached as a question of citizenship, constitutional rights, public responsibility, national security and the future relationship between Bangladesh and its global diaspora.
If there is national consensus for reform, Bangladesh should consider amending its Constitution so that eligible Bangladeshis by birth or descent—including those born outside Bangladesh—are not automatically excluded from public service simply because they hold another citizenship.
This is not a proposal for any particular person or political party.
It is a proposal for the Bangladesh of future generations.
First, One Point Must Be Made Clear
There is a fundamental difference between a question being raised about someone’s citizenshipand that person being legally proven ineligible on citizenship grounds.
An allegation may be made.
A lawyer may issue a legal notice.
A political party may raise questions.
An individual may provide an explanation.
But none of these, by itself, is a substitute for a final legal determination by the appropriate constitutional authority or court.
Citizenship disputes should therefore be examined through several separate questions:
What exactly is being alleged?
What is the position of the individual concerned?
What do the official records show?
What does the applicable law provide?
If necessary, what is the position of the court or relevant constitutional authority?
First the facts.
Then the law.
Then the decision.
That distinction is essential for responsible journalism, constitutional government and a healthy democratic debate.
What Does the Constitution of Bangladesh Say?
Article 66 of the Constitution of Bangladesh sets out the principal qualifications and disqualifications for membership of Parliament.
Under the existing constitutional framework, provisions concerning citizenship of a foreign state and allegiance to a foreign state are particularly important.
Therefore, under the law as it currently stands, the question of parliamentary eligibility cannot simply be reduced to:
“Does this person hold a foreign passport?”
Other questions may also be relevant:
When was the foreign citizenship acquired?
Is it still in force?
If it was renounced, when and how did thatrenunciation become legally effective?
Was the individual constitutionally qualified at the time of standing for election?
Does the individual have any formal relationship involving allegiance to a foreign state?
What do the relevant official records establish?
These are legal and evidential questions and should be determined accordingly.
But there is an even bigger question:
Is the existing constitutional framework adequate for the Bangladesh of the twenty-first century?
That is a question worthy of national debate.
Is the Question of Becoming an MP the Same as Becoming a Minister?
This is where the issue becomes even more significant.
Article 56 of the Constitution deals with the appointment of the Cabinet and includes provisions concerning ministers appointed from within and outside Parliament.
Consequently, constitutional eligibility for membership of Parliament can also become relevant when considering ministerial office.
The question of dual citizenship is therefore not simply a matter of whether someone can stand for election.
It can also have implications for appointment to the Cabinet and other important constitutional positions.
This is precisely why Bangladesh needs a clear, permanent policy rather than repeatedly confronting the same issue through individual political controversies.
Dual Citizenship: Will Bangladesh Accept Its Own Children a Second Time?
This is perhaps the central question.
If a Bangladeshi goes abroad and acquires another country’s citizenship, does that mean the person’s relationship with Bangladesh should effectively end?
Or should Bangladesh recognise that citizenship and national belonging can exist across borders?
I believe the second approach deserves serious consideration.
A person may hold two passports.
But a passport does not erase someone’s birth, family, language, culture, memories or roots.
Nor does acquiring another nationality necessarily erase a person’s commitment to Bangladesh.
For that reason, Bangladesh should consider a constitutional amendment that recognises the legitimate political and public-service rights of Bangladeshis by birth or descent, including those who hold another nationality.
Does Changing a Passport Change One’s Bangladesh Identity?
There can be many reasons why Bangladeshis acquire foreign citizenship.
Some leave for employment.
Some settle abroad permanently.
Some do so for the future of their children.
Others acquire citizenship because they were born in another country.
Some pursue education or professional opportunities overseas and eventually become citizens of the country where they have built their lives.
Many nevertheless maintain deep and continuing relationships with Bangladesh.
They invest in Bangladesh.
They send remittances.
They support families and communities.
They establish businesses.
They contribute to charitable causes.
They promote Bangladesh internationally.
So we must ask:
Can a foreign passport completely erase the rights and identity of someone who is Bangladeshi by birth or descent?
I believe that question deserves a different answer in modern Bangladesh.
Two Citizenships, One Allegiance: Does Bangladesh Need a New Constitutional Chapter?
An important distinction must be made.
Dual citizenship and dual allegiance are not necessarily the same thing.
A person may hold the citizenship of another country without holding any position in that country’s government.
Conversely, a person may not be a foreign citizen but may have relationships or responsibilities that create a genuine conflict with Bangladesh’s national interests.
Therefore, a future constitutional amendment should not rely exclusively on the question of whether someone possesses a second passport.
It should also consider:
Whether the individual holds a position with a foreign government;
Whether there is a formal obligation of allegiance toa foreign state;
Whether foreign financial or business interests could create a conflict of interest;
Whether the individual has responsibilities incompatible with public office in Bangladesh;
Whether there is a genuine and demonstrable national-security concern.
These are more meaningful questions than simply counting passports.
Is a Foreign Passport a Measure of Patriotism?
There is a danger of confusing emotion with law and constitutional principle.
A person should not automatically be labelled unpatriotic simply because he or she has become a citizen of another country.
At the same time, holding Bangladeshi citizenship alone does not automatically make someone suitable for every public office.
The real questions should be:
Is the individual committed to the Constitution and laws of Bangladesh?
Is there a conflict of interest?
Can the individual protect state confidentiality?
Will the individual act in the national interest?
Are there genuine national-security concerns?
These should be the central considerations.
The UK, Canada and Australia: What Can Bangladesh Learn?
There is no single global model for dual citizenship.
Different democracies have developed different approaches based on their histories, constitutional structures and national interests.
The United Kingdom provides an important example. Current UK parliamentary information confirms that a British citizen with dual nationality can register to vote and stand for UK parliamentary elections, subject to the other qualifying requirements.
UUK Parliament+1
UK law also does not generally require a person to renounce another nationality when acquiring British citizenship.
HHansard
This does not mean Bangladesh must copy the British system.
Bangladesh has its own history, Constitution, political circumstances and national-security considerations.
But it demonstrates that dual citizenship and participation in democratic political life are not inherently incompatible.
Other countries have adopted different approaches, including stricter constitutional restrictions.
The lesson is therefore simple:
There is no single democratic answer to dual citizenship.
Bangladesh must decide what approach best serves Bangladesh.
Bangladeshis Born Abroad: Should Birth in Another Country Deny Them Their Bangladesh?
There is another crucial dimension that must not be overlooked.
Any constitutional reform concerning dual citizenship should not be restricted to people physically born in Bangladesh.
It should also cover eligible Bangladeshis by birth or descent who are born abroad—in the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, Europe, the Middle East or anywhere else in the world.
The fact that a child of Bangladeshi parents is born in London, New York, Toronto, Sydney or elsewhere should not automatically determine whether that person can one day serve Bangladesh.
Born Abroad, But Bangladeshi by Descent
The children and grandchildren of Bangladeshis living abroad are part of a growing global Bangladeshi community.
Many were born outside Bangladesh.
Many were educated abroad.
Many speak several languages.
Many have professional experience in some of the world’s leading institutions.
Yet they may still have deep family, cultural and ancestral connections to Bangladesh.
Some visit Bangladesh regularly.
Some invest there.
Some support charities and communities.
Some maintain businesses and professional relationships.
Some may genuinely wish to return one day and serve the country of their parents or grandparents.
Should the place of their birth automatically prevent them from doing so?
I believe it should not.
If Bangladesh undertakes constitutional reform, it should recognise eligible Bangladeshis by birth or descent, wherever they were born, rather than creating a distinction between a Bangladeshi born in Dhaka and a Bangladeshi born in London.
Bangladesh’s Children Should Not Be Defined by Their Place of Birth
A modern constitutional framework should recognise that citizenship and national belonging are no longer confined by geography.
A Bangladeshi family may have one generation born in Dhaka, another in London, another in New York and another in Toronto.
The world has changed.
Bangladeshis have become a global people.
Therefore, a constitutional amendment should not say:
“You were born outside Bangladesh, therefore you cannot serve Bangladesh.”
The principle should instead be:
“If you have a legitimate constitutional connection to Bangladesh by birth or descent, and you meet the requirements of Bangladeshi law, you should not be excluded from public service merely because you were born abroad or hold another citizenship.”
That would be a far more inclusive and forward-looking constitutional principle.
From Bangladeshi Abroad to National Leader: Should the Constitution Change for Dual Citizens?
This may be one of the most important questions of all.
Imagine a second-generation Bangladeshi born and educated in Britain who becomes an internationally respected lawyer.
Imagine a Bangladeshi-American scientist with world-class expertise in technology.
Imagine a Bangladeshi-Canadian entrepreneur with extensive international business experience.
Imagine a Bangladeshi-Australian economist with decades of experience in public policy.
If such people have a legitimate Bangladeshi citizenship connection and genuinely wish to serve Bangladesh, should their birthplace outside Bangladesh permanently disqualify them from Parliament?
Why should it?
Their international experience could actually strengthen Bangladesh’s institutions.
Of course, public office should never be automatic.
They must meet the same democratic, legal, ethical and constitutional standards as everyone else.
But being born abroad or holding another citizenship should not, by itself, close the door.
Not Just Remittances, But Leadership: Should Bangladesh Open the Constitutional Door to Dual Citizens?
Bangladesh’s diaspora does not contribute only money.
They bring international experience.
They acquire knowledge of new technologies.
They understand different systems of administration.
They build international business networks.
They gain exposure to different political and social institutions.
This human capital is an enormous potential resource for Bangladesh.
Therefore, the relationship between Bangladesh and its diaspora should not be confined to remittances.
The question should be:
Will Bangladesh treat its citizens abroad only as economic contributors, or will it also recognise their knowledge, skills and leadership potential as national assets?
If the answer is the latter, then Bangladesh needs to rethink the constitutional framework governing political participation by dual citizens.
Remittances should not be the ceiling of diaspora citizenship.
Leadership, knowledge, investment, public service and political participation should also be possible—subject to the Constitution and the law.
A Global Bangladeshi Nation
This is particularly important because the Bangladeshi diaspora is no longer simply a temporary community living abroad.
For many families, several generations have now grown up outside Bangladesh.
Their children and grandchildren may be British-Bangladeshis, American-Bangladeshis, Canadian-Bangladeshis, Australian-Bangladeshis or citizens of other countries while retaining a genuine Bangladeshi heritage and connection.
They should not automatically be viewed as outsiders.
They are part of Bangladesh’s global human capital.
Their contribution should not be measured only by how much money they send home.
It should also be measured by what they can contribute in terms of:
Education;
Professional expertise;
Technology;
Investment;
International networks;
Administrative experience;
Diplomatic understanding;
Entrepreneurship;
Leadership.
Is a Middle Ground Possible?
Absolutely.
There is a reasonable middle path between completely excluding dual citizens from political life and allowing unrestricted access to every state position without appropriate safeguards.
The principle could be:
Bangladeshi by birth or descent — rights should be recognised.
Foreign citizenship — must be disclosed.
Public office — must be exercised with accountability.
Conflicts of interest — must be declared and controlled.
National security — must remain the highest priority.
Such a framework could protect both Bangladesh’s national interests and the legitimate rights of Bangladeshis living around the world.
Should There Be Separate Restrictions for Certain State Positions?
Yes, potentially—but such restrictions must be clear, objective and equally applicable to everyone.
Positions directly connected with defence, home affairs, foreign affairs, intelligence and national security may reasonably require additional scrutiny or safeguards.
But these restrictions should never be designed around a particular individual or political party.
The same law must apply equally to everyone.
Should Citizenship Be Verified Before an Election?
If Bangladesh amends its Constitution to permit political participation by eligible dual citizens, there should also be a transparent disclosure system before elections.
Every candidate could be required to declare:
Current citizenship.
Citizenship of any other country.
By Advocate Shafiqul Haque
Former Solicitor, Senior Courts of England
Former Mayor, Tower Hamlets Council, UK
Author, Political Analyst and Writer
