On 23-24 February 2024, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh organised an international conference on the South Asian Constitutional Courts in the twenty-first century: Lessons from Bangladesh and India. The inauguration ceremony of the first of its kind two-day conference was graced by Mr. Mohammed Shahabuddin, the Hon'ble President of the People's Republic of Bangladesh as chief guest and was chaired by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of Bangladesh, Mr. Justice Obaidul Hassan.

The welcome remarks were delivered by Mr. Justice Borhanuddin, Hon'ble Judge, Appellate Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh. Other dignitaries, along with the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India, Dr. Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, were Mr. Anisul Huq, Hon'ble Minister of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Mr. Abu Mohammad Amin Uddin, Attorney General for Bangladesh, Mr. Md. Momtazuddin Fakir, President of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

The words of the Hon'ble Chief Justice of Bangladesh were indicative of his perception of the constitutional tapestry in South Asia (on the global map of constitutionalism) as a distinct yet common experience with different context-specific nuances. His words also emphasised the growing prominence of South Asian voices within the global constitutional discourse. The inaugural discussions, among others, highlighted the ideals of the Father of the Nation, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and his contributions, to the making of the Bangladesh Constitution.

The conference had four concurrent panels journeying into the South Asian constitutional continuum with specific focus on Bangladesh and India. Panel I, with Mr. Justice Aniruddha Bose, Hon'ble Judge, Supreme Court of India, and Dr. Justice Syed Refaat Ahmed, Hon'ble Judge, High Court Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh as paper presenters and Mr. Justice Syed Mahmud Hossain, Hon'ble former Chief Justice of Bangladesh, as moderator, deliberated on the constitutional moments, as Bruce Ackerman would call them, of India and Bangladesh. Drawing on the historical specificities, the discussion on Bangladesh, among others, portrayed how the 'popular will' came to undergird the basic fabric of the Bangladesh Constitution. The discussion on India focused on assessing the nature of rights as perceived by the Constitution drafters. The discussants in the first panel were Mr. Probir Neogi, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh, and Professor Dr. Mizanur Rahman, former chairman, National Human Rights Commission, Bangladesh.

Panel II, with Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta, Hon'ble Judge, Supreme Court of India and Justice Naima Haider, Hon'ble Judge, High Court Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh as the panellists and Mr. Justice Hasan Foez Siddique, Hon'ble former Chief Justice of Bangladesh as the moderator, reflected on the role of judiciary in upholding constitutionalism. In particular, it emphasised the role of the judiciaries of Bangladesh and India in shaping electoral and administrative jurisprudence and ensuring good governance in the two countries. The discussants in this panel were Barrister Mustafizur Rahman, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh and Professor Dr. Rumana Islam, member, Bangladesh Securities and Exchange Commission.

In the third panel, Mr. Justice Sheikh Hassan Arif, Hon'ble judge of the High Court Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh and Mr. Justice Soumen Sen, Hon'ble Judge, Calcutta High Court, presented their papers on regional convergences and divergences in South Asian constitutional jurisprudence. The session was moderated by Mr. Justice Md. Ashfaqul Islam, Hon'ble Judge, Appellate Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh. The panellists primarily deliberated on the significant convergences that have taken place so far (e.g., with respect to the jurisprudence on public interest litigation, judicial review of laws as well as constitutional amendments). The discussion also highlighted the counterbalancing of convergences by waves of divergences, confirming the empirical studies of Tom Ginsburg and others that there is no systematic pattern of constitutional convergences. The discussants for panel III were Barrister Tanjibul Alam, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh and Professor Dr. Biswajit Chanda, Member, University Grants Commission, Bangladesh.

The fourth panel had Mr. Justice Md. Shahinur Islam, Chairman, International Crimes Tribunal-1 and Mr. Justice Arijit Banerjee, Hon'ble Judge of the Calcutta High Court as panellists and Mr. Justice Md. Abu Zafor Siddique, Hon'ble Judge of the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh, as moderator. This session focused on the judiciary's engagement with specific rights which involve competing interests of different stakeholders and require the courts to find a delicate equilibrium. The panel also explored the intersection of constitutional law and international crimes. The discussants for this panel were Mr. Ahsanul Karim, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh and Professor Dr. SM Masum Billah, Department of Law, Jagannath University.

In addition to the fascinating panel discussions on both historically relevant as well as contemporary constitutional issues, in the event's valedictory session, the Chief Justice of India delivered his keynote speech on Postcolonial Constitutional Development in South Asia. Echoing the Chief Justice of Bangladesh, Dr. Chandrachud emphasised the common yet distinct experience within South Asia's evolving post-colonial constitutional landscape.

Another significant feature of his keynote, relevant even beyond South Asia, is the implied recognition of the syncretic nature of the post-colonial Constitutions and their impact on constitutionalism. Most post-colonial Constitutions, with transformative agendas, envision the State both as empowered/active (to bring about the socio-economic reforms) and as limited/restrained (to not curtail individual rights or liberties). Such juxtaposition of positive and negative constitutionalism, entails striking a fine balance between active governance and cautious statecraft. Failure to strike such a balance, Mark A. Graber observes, may set the premise for constitutional crises within a democratic polity. The Chief Justice of India opined that both Bangladesh and India, albeit with few rough patches, but with transformative constitutional agendas, have been successful in this regard.

In the valedictory session of the conference, welcome remarks were delivered by Mr. Justice M Enayetur Rahim, Hon'ble Judge, Appellate Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh. As the chief guest of the valedictory session, Hon'ble Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina observed that such an initiative was indeed timely. Among others, she also discussed the constitutional changes introduced in article 7 (through introducing articles 7A and 7B), in order to prevent extra-constitutional regimes from subverting the Constitution.

In their concluding remarks, both the Chief Justices of Bangladesh and India expressed their ambitious intentions to take the South Asian constitutional discourse forward through regional dialogues and engagements. Indeed, the conference engaged two major constitutional Courts in the South Asian region in conversation. Interestingly, the thoughtful conversation was not limited to judges only; academics, practitioners and jurists added new dimensions to the same. As such, it would perhaps not be an exaggeration to borrow from Philip Dann's postulation on the Global South, and comment that the conference was a nascent step, marking rather a 'South Asian turn' in comparative constitutional law.

Psymhe Wadud teaches law at the University of Dhaka.