Bangladesh Politicalscape Division Deepens Over Democratization Roadmap

SALEEM SAMAD

The majority of people in Bangladesh are in the dark and groping in the wild to understand what the much-talked-about “July National Charter” is about, a political roadmap for democratic transition, at the behest of the Interim Government.

A genuine national consensus on the path to democratic renewal has fallen short of expectations. Uncertainty surrounding its implementation has left several political parties hesitant to sign, despite an eleventh-hour intervention by Chief Adviser Nobel laureate Professor Muhammad Yunus.

Many parties have shown themselves to be unable to bridge their differences over the nation’s future direction. Since the circulation of the final draft, some have questioned whether the exercise produced any meaningful consensus, wrote Kamal Ahmed, a columnist and former Chairperson of Media Reforms Commission of the Interim Government.

Last Friday, millions with access to national media, including television, newspapers, news portals, and social media, who are supposed to make informed decisions, plunged into a state of confusion over the new political roadmap.

Hasnat Quaiyum, president of the left-leaning Bangladesh Rastro Songskar Andolon, described the draft as “weaker” than the accord reached among the three alliances during the 1990s student uprising against former military ruler General HM Ershad.

However, the two major political parties Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Awami League, in a see-saw to power several times, never bothered to bring about legislation in the parliament to implement the reforms agreed to in the joint declaration post-1990.

The Charter was named after the July-August Monsoon Revolution, which ousted autocratic Sheikh Hasina after 15 years of rule. A year ago, the street protests killed nearly 1400 young people in 36 days of Monsoon Revolution.

With the July Charter finally taking shape, Mohiuddin Alamgir of the Daily Star looks into the changes in the constitution, legislative structure, balance of power, and caretaker government system, as well as the new laws needed to reshape governance.

The Charter, born out of a compact among political parties, proposes a raft of constitutional reforms to reinvigorate Bangladesh’s parliament, which has remained weak and failed to function as an effective check on executive authority.

The proposals include the introduction of a bicameral legislature, a stronger opposition bench, institutional oversight, and checks and balances at the heart of parliamentary democracy.

Very few topics in Bangladesh’s political discourse have sparked as much debate or endured as long as the caretaker government system. To many, it represents not just a procedural framework but also a reliable means of conducting free and fair elections.

Introduced in 1991 through a rare political consensus, the caretaker system was widely accepted as a safeguard to ensure neutral elections, free from the influence of ruling parties. It was incorporated into the constitution in 1996.

Its unilateral abolition by the Awami League government in 2011 triggered a decade-long bitter dispute over an acceptable mechanism for holding credible elections.

The issue has emerged again with renewed urgency, as the July charter calls for the restoration of the system.

Restoring the caretaker system with more safeguards in the charter has been stressed. Presently, the Supreme Court is hearing the abrogation of the caretaker government system.

Once the apex court renders a verdict on the cancellation of the system, Bangladesh will switch to the caretaker system mode. The Interim Government will cease to function 90 days before the election and hand over power to the Caretaker Government.

Reforms ahead of the national election have been the most consistent pledge of the interim government. One of the core reforms, apart from reviving the caretaker government system, is to bring about a balance of power between the prime minister and the president.

For years, critics have warned that the immense constitutional powers vested in the prime minister risk fostering authoritarianism, with the post of president remaining largely ceremonial, devoid of substantive authority.

The July Charter proposes curbing the PM’s overarching powers and strengthening the role of the president.

“To prevent the emergence of a fascist regime in the future, there must be a balance of power,” said Prof Ali Riaz, vice president of the National Consensus Commission.

Political parties have long stressed the need for a mechanism to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of the head of the government.

“Nearly all institutions are subject to the prime minister’s unilateral control. The president is constitutionally bound to act on the advice of the prime minister. In effect, the president holds no independent authority,” remarked Riaz.

Presently, the post of president is ceremonial. Real executive authority lies with the PM, who is the most powerful political actor with control over the executive, strong influence over the legislature, and indirect dominance over other state organs, wrote Alamgir.

Following independence, Bangladesh adopted a parliamentary system of government. However, the country transitioned to a presidential form through the fourth amendment to the constitution in 1975.

The parliamentary system was reinstated in 1991, designating the prime minister as the executive head of the government and the president as the constitutional head of state. In reality, the president acts on the PM’s advice in almost all matters.

In an effort to curb the concentration of power in the Prime Minister’s Office, according to the charter, most political parties agreed that an individual may serve as PM for a maximum of 10 years. The PM will not be the leader of the ruling party in the parliament.

The charter proposes that a lawmaker would be barred from holding the office of PM and remaining party chief at the same time. However, BNP and several like-minded parties issued a note of dissent on the matter.

Not to the surprise of political analysts, the Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islam always echoed the Interim Government’s election road map, without any question.

“The aim here is to create a degree of separation between the party and the government, thereby reducing the concentration of power in the hands of the prime minister,” Ali Riaz said.

“Plenty of theoretical ideas are there [in the charter], but what will happen in reality remains to be observed,” said Al Masud Hasanuzzaman, a former teacher of Jahangirnagar University.

Consensus Commission Vice President Ali Riaz said the overarching objective is to establish an accountable state and strengthen its institutions so that the country is not governed by the whims of any individual or group.

Kamal Ahmed, consultant editor of The Daily Star, concludes that the deeper divisions surfaced over contentious political questions. Disagreements persist over the powers of the proposed second chamber in parliament, eligibility criteria for its members, provisions for amending or suspending the constitution, appointments to key constitutional and regulatory bodies, the president’s impeachment process, nominating a deputy speaker from the opposition, and parliamentary ratification of international treaties.

First published in the Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan, 20 October 2025

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com>; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

India Never Questioned the Bangladesh Elections

SALEEM SAMAD

Last week, the Indian External Affairs Secretary Vikram Misri opined that Bangladesh should hold a free, fair, and inclusive election. It is fair to make a generalist statement to a group of visiting Bangladeshi journalists in Delhi.

The Bangladesh Foreign Affairs Advisor Touhid Ahmed, in a rebuttal, said that the Indian foreign secretary’s remark on the upcoming polls was ‘completely unwarranted’, saying that it is entirely an internal affair of the country.

“I see that statement as not their matter; it is entirely an internal issue for Bangladesh, and such comments are completely unwarranted,” he told local reporters recently. Prof Muhammad Yunus has announced that the general election will be held next February. The announcement was made after several parleys with political parties.

The journalists did not counter that the ousted Sheikh Hasina had held elections in 2014, 2018, and 2024. The three elections were fraudulently organized sans opposition political parties. Tens of thousands of opposition leaders, members, and sympathizers were held in prison for months during each election. What the journalists could not respond that, soon after the questionable elections were held, India was the first country to congratulate Hasina for being elected for another term of office.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in the days after elections, posted a congratulatory message on Twitter (X) hailing Hasina for holding an election. Such a post gives a hidden message that India will always remain beside Bangladesh. Delhi never advised Dhaka to hold a free, fair, and inclusive election. Possibly Hindu-extremist ruling Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) never wanted to embarrass their all-weather friend Hasina in urging to hold credible elections in Bangladesh.

Several countries in the West, including the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, the United Nations, and even Japan, urged Hasina to hold free, fair, and inclusive elections. Their request fell on deaf ears. She often barked at the West, stating that they are creating political pressure on her government in the election, and told conspiracy theories. This was later found to be based on misinformation and fake news.

In another statement by the Indian External Affairs Secretary that India would continue to engage with whoever comes to power in Bangladesh through free, fair, transparent, internationally recognized, and participatory elections. This statement was clearly understood, that India will reset its button after an elected government takes charge, likely in the coming February. Until then, the hot and cold relations will continue during the Interim Government. Delhi South Block will continue to go slow in bilateral relations with Dhaka. Whichever political party comes to power, it will be critical of India’s foreign policy and bilateral relations. The new government will vehemently oppose the Indians in every sphere.

The new democratically elected government will demand to resolve the long dispute on water-sharing, border-killing by Indian forces, pushing “illegal migrants” through the porous borders, lopsided trade balance, and other issues, including relaxing the visa regime. On the visa regime: India has clamped a moratorium on the issuance of tourist visas to Bangladeshi nationals since the ouster of Hasina. Except for one in Dhaka, other visa centers have been shut down for more than a year.

The Bangladeshi journalists have raised the issue of the visa regime in Delhi South Block. Indian Secretary Misri did not give a plan for resuming visas to Bangladeshi. On the other hand, Bangladesh missions in India have continued issuing visas to Indian nationals on a priority basis. Yunus urged the diplomatic missions abroad to expedite visas to journalists. Now all missions have been issuing visas to foreign journalists, including Indian scribes.

Earlier, journalists seeking a visa faced a hassle and were often turned down or rejected. The visa application first arrives at the Foreign Ministry. The application travels through the bureaucrat’s desk of the Home Affairs Ministry and the Information Ministry. After approval, the journalists and TV crew were given visas. Before arriving in Bangladesh, the journalists or TV crews were briefed on do’s and don’ts. After arriving in the country, the smart guys from the security agencies kept surveillance of their movements, the people they met, and the places they visited.

The crucial issue would be to extradite Sheikh Hasina from a military safe-house somewhere in Delhi without any conditions. Another critical issue would be to deport hundreds of most-wanted Awami League leaders, party members, and their cohorts living in exile, mostly in Kolkata. According to The Print, an Indian portal, it is estimated that 1,300 Awami League leaders and members are living in India. Their official status of staying in India is unknown.

The Awami League has opened two offices in Kolkata and New Delhi. Delhi has not commented on the party leaders and members overstaying in India, and has also made no comment on their offices in India. If Delhi does not comply with the extradition of the wanted persons within the stipulated deadline, the new government in Dhaka will surely declare non-cooperation with India. Many other actions will follow, which will be difficult for Delhi to digest.

What Ambassador Humayun Kabir, also President of Bangladesh Enterprise Institute (BEI), says India never faced any challenges from Bangladesh. Prof Yunus deliberately avoids confrontation with India. Even then, Yunus is despised by the Delhi South Block and the BJP. The upcoming political government in 2026, the Bangladesh-India relations are likely to turn sour, and the bone of contention will center on Hasina.

India will be in a dilemma to extradite Hasina and improve the relations or keep her in a safe-house and jeopardize the relations, says Kabir. India will bully Bangladesh, which will not be liked by the West. She (India) will not be able to justify the poor relations with Bangladesh to the West, nor can she raise the issue to the United Nations or any world forum to resolve the bilateral relations.

First published in Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan, 09 October 2025

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com>; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

https://stratheia.com/india-never-questioned-the-bangladesh-elections/

India Spreading ‘Fake News’ About Anti-Hindu Violence

SALEEM SAMAD

Bangladesh, like elsewhere, the Hindus are celebrating a weeklong Durga Puja. This is the second Durga Puja celebration since the Interim Government took charge of the helm of affairs of the nation.

Durga Puja is widely celebrated with great enthusiasm, color, festivity, and religious passion by Bangla-speaking Hindu diasporas and in several neighboring Indian states and among those living abroad.

The festival goes beyond religion to promote strength, unity, and community spirit. However, the Puja is not the mainstream religious festival of majoritarian Indians. They celebrate the Diwali festival of lights.

“There is no anti-Hindu violence,” Chief Adviser of the Interim Government Professor Muhammad Yunus said in an interview with veteran journalist Mehdi Hasan for Zeteo news media on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York last week.

Bangladesh’s majoritarian population is Sunni Muslims, and the religious minorities make up a small but diverse portion of the population of 9 per cent.

Hindus are the largest minority of 8 per cent, followed by Buddhists and Christians. The country has a tiny population of Shia Muslims, Ahmadiyya Muslims, Baha’is, animists, and atheists. Dismissing the claims as misinformation, Yunus told Hasan, “One of the specialities of India right now is fake news.”

Professor Yunus, a Nobel Peace Prize-winning economist, became the interim head of Bangladesh following the 2024 July Uprising known as Monsoon Revolution that led to the ouster of former fascist Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

Mehdi sits down with Yunus in New York, a year after student protesters in his country ousted the repressive former prime minister Sheikh Hasina, who ruled the 174 million people with an iron hand for more than 15 years.

The Nobel Laureate accuses India of spreading ‘fake news’ about anti-Hindu violence. Delhi often blames the Dhaka authorities for not doing enough to ensure protection and security for the Hindu population, especially the protection of Hindu temples, which Indian authorities claim are being sporadically attacked.

Dhaka avoids pointing fingers at Delhi for persecution, intimidation, and violence by Hindu extremists on Dalits (untouchable community), Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Adivasis (ethnic communities), and others.

In November, around 30,000 Hindus in Bangladesh gathered to protest Yunus’ interim government, demanding protection and security, with Donald Trump even weighing in to call Bangladesh’s treatment of Hindus “barbaric”. “One of the specialities of India right now is fake news,” the Nobel laureate tells Zeteo, before declaiming, “There’s no anti-Hindu violence.”

Once, Murshidabad was the capital of Nawab Sirajuddowla (1756-1757), the last independent Nawab of Bengal. The young Muslim ruler met at the Battle of Plassey in 1757. He was defeated by the British East India Company. His defeat marked the end of the 500-year-long Muslim rule over Bengal.

In the same capital, a pavilion of a Durga Puja at Murshidabad, in a state adjacent to Bangladesh. The goddess Durga has other faces of Prof Yunus as a demon, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, and US President Donald Trump as evils. It did not surprise many, the organizers deliberately avoided Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu, blamed for atrocities in Gaza.

BBC Bangla was the first to post a visual story of the Puja celebration in Murshidabad, which enraged the netizens and social media users in Bangladesh and the Bangladeshi diasporas abroad. The tension and distrust between the two neighboring countries in South Asia have gone cold. No visible diplomatic initiatives from Dhaka and Delhi to warm up the relations.

In one incident, Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal urged the interim government in Dhaka to “live up to its responsibility” of protecting minorities without “inventing excuses.” MEA protested the claim of vandalism at Rabindranath Tagore’s ancestral home in Shahzadpur, north of Bangladesh.

Immediately Indian government, Indian political figures, and Hindutva–aligned social media handlers circulated about the vandalism at Rabindranath Tagore’s ancestral home. Bangladesh Chief Adviser’s Press Wing, after fact-check, debunked the Indian claim and posted a statement on its verified Facebook page.

Without a fact-check, India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) expressed concern over the incident. MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal claimed that the attack was portrayed as a “systematic Islamist attack” or “terrorist act” against a symbol of Hindu heritage.

MEA spokesperson in his rhetoric on Bangladesh often states: “The attack falls in the broad pattern of systematic attempts made by extremists to erase the symbols of tolerance and eviscerate the syncretic culture and the cultural legacy of Bangladesh.”

Several Indian media outlets have circulated videos claiming that Hindus are being targeted by ‘Islamist forces’ in Bangladesh. Analysts say that while there have been attacks on minorities during the political unrest, the media is exaggerating the scale, says Qatar-based international TV network Al Jazeera.

South Asia witnessed a continuation of religious violence, fake news, and political messaging that mainly targeted Muslim minorities. In India, there were mob attacks, hate speeches by religious leaders, and forced deportations of Muslims to Bangladesh, wrote Mohammed Raihan in The Insighta, an analytical portal.

At the same time, some Indian media were alleged to spread false stories about events in Bangladesh, claiming attacks on Hindus, he wrote inThe Insighta. There is no hide and seek, India has huge discomfort and embarrassment about the political changeover in Bangladesh that took place on 5th August.

Developing events suggest that India considers the changeover as its ‘political defeat in Bangladesh’ and unleashing vengeful plots in hegemonic arrogance to destabilize the country to put back the government of its choice in power, writes Mohammad Abdur Razzak in a secular newspaper, The New Age, published from Dhaka.

Playing the Hindu card, the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in a message on his X (Twitter) handle, urged the chief adviser to Bangladesh’s interim government few days after Yunus was sworn in August last year to “ensure the safety and protection of the Hindus and all other minorities in Bangladesh”.

According to Indian media outlet The Wire published a short documentary titled “Being Hindu in Bangladesh is Not a Black and White Story,” which tells the personal story of Deepak Kumar Goswami, a well-known actor from Bangladesh who is a Hindu. He talks about what it’s really like to live as a Hindu in a Muslim majority country.

Deepak shows that life in Bangladesh for Hindus isn’t just good or bad – it’s more complex than what some Indian media shows. In the documentary, Deepak criticizes the Indian media for spreading propaganda after Hasina fled to India, questioning whether it truly supports Hindus or serves Hasina’s interests.

He rejects the portrayal of the July 2024 uprising as an Islamist movement, pointing out that Hindus, including himself, also opposed Hasina—a fact ignored by the Indian media.

Another bone of contention is the recent anti-immigrant crackdown in India. The crackdown ensued after the Pahalgam massacre by Islamic militants’ attack on tourists in Indian administered Kashmir.

Hundreds of Muslim migrants are forced into Bangladesh's porous borders. Many were found to be Indian citizens. Their crime, they speak Bangla and, most importantly, Muslims are eligible to the deported.

Indian ‘Godi Media’, within a few days after the fall of Hasina, quoting “reliable sources” inside Bangladesh, claimed a military coup in the country and Prof Yunus’ government is a façade.

When the Godi Media found the conspiracy theory of a military coup narrative is not credible, they quickly changed their claim that the Yunus government is governed by the Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami.

Yunus addressed a group of researchers and academicians in New York last week. He flagged a piece of fake news claiming that the Gen Z (youths) who brought about change in Bangladesh are Taliban. “They even said I’m a Taliban too. I don’t have a beard. I just left it at home,” he laughed.

The Nobel laureate is a staunch secularist. The Grameen Bank, which he founded, has beneficiaries of 10.75 million (August 2025), with 97% of them being rural women. He has brought about the empowerment of women and supported them from sinking into poverty.

The person who has worked with millions of women over several decades and even got the rural women in the Grameen Bank as board members, is regularly slammed by the Indian media as being backed by the Islamists, Mullahs, and Muslim radicals. It is indeed a pity, remarked political historian and researcher Mohiuddin Ahmad.

First published in Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com>; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad