Article 47 Saving for certain laws
Saving for certain laws
It is why the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973 and many economic laws cannot be struck down for breaching fundamental rights. Investors should note its protection for nationalisation and State monopoly laws.
Parliament enacts a law nationalising an industry and declares that it gives effect to the fundamental principles of state policy in Part II. Article 47(1) then protects it from challenge under Part III. The express declaration in the law itself is essential for this protection.
Laws listed in the First Schedule continue in full force and cannot be held void for inconsistency with any part of the Constitution. Parliament can still amend, modify or repeal them. This gives those laws a stronger shield than ordinary statutes.
Clause (3) protects laws providing for the detention, prosecution or punishment of forces members, individuals, groups or organisations, or prisoners of war, for genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes. Clause (3) was added by the First Amendment in 1973.
An accused before the International Crimes Tribunal argues the 1973 Act breaches the Constitution. Article 47(3) means that argument cannot succeed, and Article 47A removes certain related rights. The trial therefore proceeds under the 1973 Act and its own procedure.
In plain English
How Article 47 works
Article 47 protects certain kinds of law from being struck down for conflicting with fundamental rights. Clause (1) covers laws on matters such as nationalisation and compulsory acquisition of property, merging companies, mineral rights, State monopolies in trade or services, and regulation of property and business rights, but only if Parliament expressly declares the law gives effect to the fundamental principles of state policy in Part II. Clause (2) protects the laws listed in the First Schedule from challenge under any provision of the Constitution, though they can still be amended or repealed. Clause (3) protects laws for trying genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, so they cannot be challenged as unconstitutional.
In practice
Article 47(3), added by the First Amendment 1973, protects the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973, under which tribunals since 2010 have tried crimes of 1971. After 2024 the same Act has been used for crimes committed during the July 2024 uprising. In May 2025 the interim government issued the International Crimes (Tribunals) (Second Amendment) Ordinance 2025, empowering the tribunal to act against organisations, including political parties, as reported. On 17 November 2025 International Crimes Tribunal-1 sentenced former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and former home minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal to death, as reported. Clause (1) remains relevant to nationalisation and State monopoly laws affecting business.
The text
What Article 47 says
47. (1) No law providing for any of the following matters shall be deemed to be void on the ground that it is inconsistent with, or takes away or abridges, any of the rights guaranteed by this Part – (a) the compulsory acquisition, nationalisation or requisition of any property, or the control or management thereof whether temporarily or permanently; ... (e) the carrying on by the Government or by a corporation owned, controlled or managed by the Government, of any trade, business, industry or service to the exclusion, complete or partial, of other persons ; or (f) the extinction, modification, restriction or regulation of any right to property, any right in respect of profession, occupation, trade or business or the rights of employers or employees in any statutory public authority or in any commercial or industrial undertaking ; if Parliament in such law (including, in the case of existing law, by amendment) expressly declares that such provision is made to give effect to any of the fundamental principles of state policy set out in Part II of this Constitution.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Constitution the laws specified in the First Schedule (including any amendment of any such law) shall continue to have full force and effect, and no provision of any such law, nor anything done or omitted to be done under the authority of such law, shall be deemed void or unlawful on the ground of inconsistency with, or repugnance to, any provision of this Constitution: [Provided that nothing in this article shall prevent amendment, modification or repeal of any such law.]
[(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Constitution, no law nor any provision thereof providing for detention, prosecution or punishment of any person, who is a member of any armed or defence or auxiliary forces [or any individual, group of individuals or organisation] or who is a prisoner of war, for genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes and other crimes under international law shall be deemed void or unlawful, or ever to have become void or unlawful, on the ground that such law or provision of any such law is inconsistent with, or repugnant to, any of the provisions of this Constitution.]
Key clauses shown. Omitted text is marked with an ellipsis; read the full text on the official site.
English text as published on the official Laws of Bangladesh website. Where a court has changed the position, the status note above explains it.
Landmark cases
How the courts have read it
Appellate Division · 2013
Abdul Quader Mollah v Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal (review)
Held that Article 47A(2) did not oust the Appellate Division's own power to review its judgment in an International Crimes Tribunal appeal, but dismissed the review petitions on the merits on 12 December 2013.
Case summaries are short descriptions for orientation, not a substitute for the judgment.
History
Amendments
- First Amendment 1973Added clause (3), protecting laws for the prosecution of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
- Fifteenth Amendment 2011Substituted the proviso to clause (2) and inserted "or any individual, group of individuals or organisation" in clause (3).
Connected provisions
Related articles
Questions
Article 47: frequently asked questions
What is Article 47 of the Constitution of Bangladesh?
Article 47 saves certain laws from being struck down for breaching fundamental rights: socio-economic laws declared to give effect to Part II principles, the laws in the First Schedule, and laws for trying genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Why can the International Crimes Tribunal Act not be challenged?
Article 47(3) provides that no law for the detention, prosecution or punishment of persons for genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes shall be deemed void on the ground of inconsistency with the Constitution. The International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973 is protected in this way.
Does Article 47 apply to organisations and political parties?
Since 2011, clause (3) covers any individual, group of individuals or organisation. In May 2025 an ordinance amended the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act to let the tribunal act against organisations, including political parties, as reported.
Sources
- Laws of Bangladesh: The Constitution, Article 47
- Dhaka Tribune: Govt empowers ICT to ban political parties over war crimes links (May 2025)
- Dhaka Tribune: Attorney General on the ICT-1 verdict (17 November 2025)
- Supreme Court of Bangladesh: Abdul Quader Mollah v Chief Prosecutor, Criminal Review Petition Nos 17-18 of 2013
This guide explains the Constitution for general understanding. It is not legal advice. Constitutional reform proposals under discussion in 2026 are described as proposals until enacted.
Constitutional and writ practice
Need to rely on Article 47?
Our lawyers advise on writ petitions, fundamental rights and public law before the Supreme Court of Bangladesh.