BDP retreat sparks debate over constitutionality

Concerned members, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of victimisation, questioned both the legitimacy and financial prudence of the retreat. They contend that any resolutions adopted during the meeting cannot formally bind party structures because they did not originate from recognised constitutional platforms. In their view, the retreat bypassed the proper chain of party processes, creating uncertainty over its outcomes.

According to these members, the BDP constitution clearly stipulates that party matters must begin at the grassroots level, from branches, cells, constituencies, and regions, before being escalated to higher organs such as the Central Committee (CC) or the National Council. “The Central Committee knows what is supposed to be done if things are to be done correctly,” one member argued. “For example, the constitution is very clear on how it can be reviewed. If leaders want to hear issues from members, they must instruct branches, constituencies, cells, and regions to convene and submit their positions. We are wasting money that we are supposed to be saving. Remember, we are now an opposition party.”