Member of Parliament Rumeen Farhana has urged the government to bring the recently signed trade agreement between Bangladesh and the United States to Parliament and move for its cancellation, calling it “against national interests.”
She made the remarks on Wednesday during the 24th sitting of the 13th session of the Jatiya Sangsad, raising the issue on a point of order after the Prime Minister’s question-and-answer session.
Farhana said that a meeting took place the previous day between the country’s commerce minister and the US Ambassador to Bangladesh, where several aspects of the bilateral trade agreement were discussed. These included the trade imbalance between the two countries, Bangladesh’s commitments to import agricultural and energy products, and proposed policy reforms aimed at improving the business climate and attracting foreign investment.
She noted that the US side highlighted a significant trade gap, pointing out that Bangladesh exports far more goods to the United States than it imports. According to her, addressing this imbalance was a key objective behind the agreement.
Farhana also criticized the timing of the deal, stating that it was signed on February 9—just three days before the national election held on February 12. She argued that civil society members and policy analysts had previously warned that an unelected government should not enter into such agreements, especially when certain clauses could be detrimental to Bangladesh’s interests.
She called on the government to present the agreement in Parliament, noting that it could be revoked within 60 days if the government chooses to do so.
At this point, Speaker Hafiz Uddin Ahmed intervened, citing Rule 301 of the parliamentary rules of procedure. He stated that Farhana’s remarks did not qualify as a valid point of order, as such points must relate to ongoing parliamentary business or maintaining order in the House.
He advised her to submit a formal notice instead, which could then be considered appropriately. Despite her request for a brief continuation, the Speaker declined to accept the matter as a point of order.
Comments Here: