DHAKA, Jan 18, 2026 (BSS) - The interim government today clarified the Chief Adviser's support for the "Yes" vote in the forthcoming referendum is consistent with democratic norms in Bangladesh, outlining major six points in favour of the government stance. "Recent commentary has raised concerns that the Interim Government and the Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus's open support for a "Yes" vote in Bangladesh's forthcoming referendum on institutional reforms may be inconsistent with the expectations of an interim administration," said a statement issued by the Chief Adviser's Press Wing this afternoon. "These concerns deserve respectful consideration. However, when assessed in light of Bangladesh's specific political context, the mandate of the interim government, and comparative international practice, such criticism does not withstand close scrutiny," it said. In Bangladesh's current transitional moment, the statement said, silence would not represent neutrality, it would represent a failure of leadership. The Interim Government's Mandate Is Reform, Not Procedural Minimalism: Bangladesh's interim government was not constituted merely to administer routine state functions or to act as a passive electoral caretaker, the statement noted, saying it emerged from an acute governance and legitimacy crisis, marked by sustained public protest, institutional breakdown, and a collapse of confidence in political processes. Its mandate-understood domestically and communicated clearly to international partners-has been to stabilize the state, restore democratic credibility, and deliver a credible framework of reforms before returning authority to an elected government, it read. "Professor Yunus, as the Chief Adviser, has spent the past eighteen months leading an unprecedented process of consultation across political parties, civil society, professional groups, and youth constituencies," the statement said, adding, the reform package now before the electorate is the product of that process. "To suggest that he should now refrain from advocating for these reforms is to misunderstand the very purpose of the interim arrangement," the statement said, adding, an interim authority entrusted with reform cannot plausibly be expected to disown that reform at the moment of democratic decision.