Umama Fatema quits raising questions against Yunus-backed student platform

In a dramatic turn of events, Umama Fatema, a prominent student activist and former spokesperson of the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement (ADSM), has publicly severed ties with the organisation she once helped lead during the tumultuous July-August 2024 coup-uprising that ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

In a lengthy Facebook post published at midnight on Friday, June 27, just two days after the formation of the ADSM’s Central Council, Umama unleashed a scathing critique of the platform, accusing its leaders of betrayal, opportunism, and unethical practices.

Hailing from the Chhatra Federation, a student group affiliated with the Ganasamhati Andolon, Umama’s departure marks a significant fracture within the student-led movement that catalysed Bangladesh’s political upheaval, raising questions about its integrity and future direction.

Her post, shared on her verified Facebook profile, declares: “My formal journey with the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement ends here.”

July fraud busted: Saifuddin claims was shot in two cities the same day

July Conspiracy: Gazetted lists contain many fake martyrs, injured fighters

Special benefits, law for July martyrs, warriors amid row over fake lists

July Conspiracy: Role of global influence in Bangladesh regime change

July death toll fraud exposed: Activists seek UN accountability

This announcement comes amid her allegations of a smear campaign, internal irregularities, and political interference that have eroded the movement’s original ideals. As a key figure in the July Uprising, Umama initially joined ADSM to uphold the sacrifices made during the protests, which escalated from a quota reform movement into a mass uprising following the government’s violent crackdown, known as the July Massacre.

However, her recent statements suggest a profound disillusionment with the movement’s evolution, particularly after its leaders formed the National Citizens Party (NCP) in February 2025.

Despite this shift, Umama chose to remain with ADSM to address the uprising’s unresolved issues, only to encounter what she describes as “political pressure, personal attacks, and obstacles from opportunistic circles within the organisation.”

Her critique centres on a perceived betrayal by former allies who, she claims, orchestrated a “terrible pressure and propaganda” campaign against her, both online and offline. Umama alleges that those she once stood with in meetings and rallies turned against her, using junior members to spread defamatory content.

She vividly recounts: “I saw while working on this platform in March-April—it has been eaten away like a worm by some opportunists from within.”

This metaphor underscores her view that the movement has been hollowed out by self-serving individuals, a stark contrast to its initial promise of justice and equality. Her refusal to align with the NCP, despite its appeal to young voters, reflects her commitment to the uprising’s original goals over political expediency.

Umama’s post also highlights specific grievances, including widespread irregularities in forming district and upazila-level committees, which she claims were ignored despite her objections. She accuses the leadership of creating “unwanted and spurious” committees prior to the NCP’s formation, suggesting a premeditated consolidation of power.

As spokesperson, she was denied access to the movement’s official Facebook page, only to find posts targeting her published from it in March. This lack of transparency extended to the recent Central Council election, which she boycotted initially due to a voter list dominated by NCP supporters, limiting candidacy to loyalists.

Though she cast a single vote hoping for positive change, the results—where a non-candidate was elected—left her “very ashamed,” reinforcing her belief that “the future of this platform is now dark.” She formally withdrew her support, citing the election’s arbitrariness as a betrayal of the uprising’s spirit.

A particularly emotional segment of her post condemns those who “hurt me, did dirty things against me, and bought and sold the coup at market prices.”

Umama’s visceral language—“I curse them from the bottom of my heart”—reflects her outrage at the commodification of the movement, where lives lost and orphans created were exploited for political gain.

She emphasises her refusal to capitalise on these tragedies, stating, “So many people have lost their lives, so many children have become orphans, I could not cash in on all this politically.” This stance aligns with her roots in the Chhatra Federation, known for its leftist, anti-exploitation ethos under Ganasamhati Andolon, which has long advocated for social justice over partisan agendas.

Her critique extends to the movement’s handling of the August 2024 coup-uprising, which she refrains from endorsing as a wholesale “people’s movement.”

While she does not explicitly support mob violence, her post implicitly distances her from the unrest’s excesses—looting, vandalism, and attacks on minorities—that followed Hasina’s ouster.

Reports of mob violence, including the burning of the Bangabandhu Memorial Museum and assaults on Hindu communities, have been widely documented, yet Umama’s focus remains on internal corruption rather than public condemnation.

She also alludes to unethical practices, such as extortion and patronage networks, which she suggests have infiltrated ADSM’s leadership. This echoes concerns raised by other student groups, like Chhatra Dal, which have accused ADSM of monopolizing representation and engaging in divisive tactics.

Her departure raises broader questions about the coup-uprising’s legacy. Umama joined ADSM to protect its dream, but she now sees it unfulfilled, overshadowed by political manoeuvring. Her advice to well-wishers and youth—“focus on your studies and work”—signals a retreat from activism, though she insists, “I am not breaking down; I am getting everything in order.”

This resilience contrasts with her scathing assessment of ADSM’s current state, where she perceives a collapse of the values that drove the July Uprising. Her exit, coinciding with the council’s formation, suggests a power struggle, possibly linked to NCP’s rise, which she resisted joining despite its youth-friendly platform.

The reaction on social media, particularly Facebook and X, has been mixed. Posts found on X reflect sentiment ranging from admiration for her integrity to scepticism about the uprising’s authenticity, with some questioning whether it was a genuine movement or an orchestrated coup.

Umama’s allegations of betrayal resonate with those disillusioned by post-uprising governance, yet her silence on mob violence and extortion leaves room for interpretation.

As a Chhatra Federation member, her critique aligns with Ganasamhati Andolon’s anti-imperialist stance, but her departure may weaken the leftist voice within ADSM, already strained by internal divisions.

Her Facebook posts mark a pivotal moment, exposing the fragility of the student movement that toppled Hasina. Her refusal to endorse mob violence or unethical practices underscores a moral stance, yet her focus on internal betrayal rather than systemic issues limits the critique’s scope.

Her voice serves as both a warning and a call to reclaim the uprising’s original promise.