After the ouster of Sheikh Hasinaโs government last August, Bangladeshโs interim government had promised a swift return to democracy. That promise has been emphatically belied as the interim government headed by Nobel Laureate Mohammed Yunus is yet to announce a roadmap for elections, writes Shinjini Sarkar. Meanwhile, the country sinks into waves of arbitrary arrests that have become a preferred state weapon to control dissent and neutralise political opposition.
From grassroots activists to former ministers, respected intellectuals to ordinary citizens joining rallies and processions or just posting on social media, people are detained not for proven crimes but simply for expressing political allegiance or exercising their right to assembly or freedom of speech and expression.
Arbitrary detention and the hypocrisy within the government
This pattern is not random; it reflects a systematic attempt to erase political pluralism from public life. Arrests are no longer about maintaining law and order; they are about silencing half of the nationโs political identity. In doing so, the interim regime pushes Bangladesh further into polarization, fear, and democratic decay.
The critical question is whether Bangladesh can break free from this cycle of repression.
Sheikh Hasina: Islam is not safe in the hands of Yunus-Jamaat clique
JMBF: 70 killed in 60 incidents of extrajudicial killings, custodial deaths
Custodial death: 27 Awami League leaders, activists killed inย 10ย months
History shows that authoritarian control, however forceful, cannot indefinitely suppress the will of a politically conscious nation. Only an inclusive, participatory election, one that allows every party, including the Awami League, to contest freely, can begin the process of healing and restore legitimacy to the political system.
Some recent arrests
Bangladesh Police recently arrested 1971 Liberation War veteran and former bureaucrat Abu Alam Shahid Khan, a prominent critic of Muhammad Yunusโs interim government.
โHe (Khan) has been arrested by Dhaka Metropolitan Policeโs detective branch in a case lodged with the Shahbagh police station,โ police said in a statement, without specifying the charges or disclosing the time and place of the arrest.
However, the statement said that five others were also arrested in the same drive for participating in โflash marchesโ, impromptu street protests frequently staged by activists of the now-disbanded Awami League of deposed prime minister Hasina.
Police said they were arrested on charges of attempting to carry out acts of sabotage and defying public order.
Khan, a retired secretary in the Bangladesh government, had in recent months been criticising the interim government on social media platforms.
He is the fourth prominent critic of the interim government to be arrested in recent weeks.
On August 7, Yunusโ staunch critic and former Rangpur University vice-chancellor Professor Nazmul Ahsan Kalimullah was taken into custody.
ACC is showing a political circus by targeting Sheikh Hasina and her family
Bangladesh: Killers freed, citizens crushed
On August 27, Dhaka University law professor Hafizur Rahman Curzon and journalist Monjurul Alam Panna were detained under the countryโs stringent Anti-Terrorism Act, along with several Liberation War veterans, including former minister Latif Siddiqui.
That arrest followed violent disruptions at a veteransโ discussion organised by the newly-formed platform Moncho-71 at the Dhaka Reporters Unity auditorium.
An Islamist mob stormed the event, branding the participants โaccomplices of Hasinaโs fascist regimeโ and accusing them of conspiring against the student-led โJuly Uprisingโ that toppled the Awami League government last year.
Police, who intervened ostensibly to rescue the participants, later charged these veterans under the anti-terror law, a move widely criticised as punishing the victims instead of perpetrators.
Siddiqui, 87, a former minister in Hasinaโs cabinet who was expelled from the Awami League over a decade ago, remains in custody along with other veterans in their late 70s.
No safe spaces left
The surge in arbitrary arrests across Bangladesh is neither random nor isolated; it is systematic, targeted, and designed to dismantle the very foundations of political organization. Each case reveals a disturbing pattern: pervasive surveillance, preemptive detention, and the deliberate criminalization of peaceful or symbolic acts of dissent.
The arrest of Sheikh Ibne Sadiq, Amir Hamza, and other grassroots leaders at Dhaka University illustrates how the regime is going after student networks that form the lifeblood of party organization. These individuals were not implicated in violence or conspiracy; their only โcrimeโ was association with the banned Chhatra League and Awami League. By targeting the youth, the state seeks to paralyze the organizational base and cripple future political mobilization, leaving a vacuum that ensures no new leadership can emerge.
Sheikh Hasina asks OHCHR, Amnesty to provide list of 1,400 deceased
Jeffry Sachs: The US professor who exposed deep stateโs role in Bangladesh uprising
In Tejgaon, nine activists were arrested after a sudden procession where they merely chanted slogans in support of Sheikh Hasina. What was essentially a peaceful civic expression was reframed as โsabotage,โ giving authorities legal cover to detain participants. The earlier arrest of former MP Saddam Hossain Pavel illustrates the broad strategy: eliminating visible leadership, prosecute even minor actors, and creating a vacuum that prevents regeneration from the bottom up.
Deep surveillance
The case of Nahida Noor Sweety, a Mahila Awami League leader, underscores how deeply this surveillance penetrates. Disguised in a burqa, she quietly participated in a post-prayer procession with her husband in Tejgaon, yet she was swiftly tracked, detained, and accused of financing rallies. The allegations stretch credibility, but they achieve a clear objective: criminalize symbolic leadership and send a chilling warning that no effort at mobilization, however discreet, will go unnoticed.
The suppression extends beyond activists to intellectual and policy circles. The arrests of former minister Abdul Latif Siddiqui and Dhaka University professor Sheikh Hafizur Rahman Curzon after the roundtable of Moncho-71 that even civil discussions are treated as criminal acts. Initially detained under the pretext of mob disorder, they were later formally arrested under anti-terror laws. These actions transform academic debate and policy discourse into evidence of conspiracy, signaling that there is no safe space left, not in classrooms, discussion forums, or the press.
Perhaps the most alarming example is the arrest of Abu Alam Shahid Khan, a retired senior secretary and once press secretary to Sheikh Hasina herself. His so-called crime was nothing more than attending a Manch 71 roundtable discussion on constitutional reform. As a respected bureaucrat turned public policy analyst, Khan embodied the intellectual space that every society needs for dialogue, debate, and critical reflection. By dragging him into custody, the regime effectively declares that no arena is safe, not television studios, not lecture halls, and not civil society gatherings. If even the most credentialed voices of reason are silent, ordinary citizens learn that speaking at all is dangerous.
Even violent incidents are exploited as pretexts for mass repression. Following clashes in Chittagongโs Saltgola Crossing, where a police sub-inspector was attacked during a procession, law enforcement detained 19 people, charging 18 named and 40 unnamed individuals. Rather than isolating perpetrators, authorities leveraged the event to conduct blanket arrests, sweeping up political activists indiscriminately. This transforms a singular incident of violence into an opportunity to dismantle entire opposition networks.
Coordinated strategy
Taken together, these cases expose a coordinated strategy: dismantle the youth base, criminalize women leaders, silence intellectuals, and use violence as justification for wide-ranging arrests. The line between lawful dissent and criminal sabotage has been deliberately erased. The goal is not justice, but paralysis, erasing political presence from the streets, campuses, and lecture halls. In this climate, silence is presented as stability, fear becomes the governing principle, and the space for any form of political participation shrinks to nothing.
What emerges from these arrests is not a series of isolated incidents, but a coherent strategy of authoritarian control. The state is no longer simply policing crime; it is redrawing the boundaries of legitimacy itself, deciding who may speak, who may assemble, and who may even exist as a political actor. This is not about law and order; it is about erasing opposition and monopolizing the public sphere.
The pattern is strikingly consistent. Youth leaders are targeted first because universities and student wings have historically been the nurseries of political change in Bangladesh. By neutralizing them, the state seeks to sever the roots of mobilization before they grow into movements. Women leaders are criminalized, signaling that no demographic, no matter how symbolic, will be exempt.
Intellectuals and former bureaucrats are silenced, closing off debate and ensuring that even policy discussions are unsafe. And when violence does occur, instead of narrowing the investigation to the guilty, authorities use it as justification for sweeping arrests, implicating dozens to crush networks wholesale.
This is not reactive policing but preemptive repression. The goal is to cultivate a climate where any association with opposition politics feels dangerous, where the cost of participation outweighs its possibility. In such a system, fear functions more effectively than force, people censor themselves, gatherings dissolve before they begin, and silence becomes the only safe response.
The cost of silence
The consequences of these arbitrary arrests extend far beyond the immediate detention of individuals; they strike at the heart of Bangladeshโs democratic fabric. By systematically silencing opposition voices, the regime ensures that the political landscape remains unchallenged, creating a ruling vacuum sustained not through legitimacy or popular support, but through repression. Democratic mechanisms, debate, dissent, and protest are replaced by surveillance, intimidation, and coercion. The very notion of political accountability erodes when fear becomes the currency of governance.
A pervasive culture of fear has taken root. Activists, intellectuals, and ordinary citizens alike now hesitate to express opinions, participate in political discussion, or organize collective action. Even small acts of civic engagement, attending a discussion forum, joining a peaceful procession, or publicly critiquing policy, carry the threat of detention. The chilling effect is profound: it transforms a vibrant civil society into a landscape of caution, silence, and self-censorship, where potential leaders are deterred from emerging.
This repression also deepens societal polarization. Exclusion from political participation breeds resentment and disillusionment. Those marginalized by blanket arrests and targeted crackdowns often retreat into underground networks or informal resistance, further destabilizing social cohesion. Instead of dialogue and negotiation, conflict becomes covert, fragmented, and potentially more volatile. The result is a cycle where fear and repression perpetuate mistrust, radicalization, and entrenched divisions.
Internationally, the implications are severe. Arbitrary arrests, especially when targeting youth leaders, women organizers, intellectuals, and former government officials, damage Bangladeshโs credibility on democracy and human rights. Global observers, human rights organizations, and foreign governments note these actions as symptomatic of a state that prioritizes control over lawful governance. The perception of Bangladesh as a fragile democracy undermines foreign investment, diplomatic engagement, and participation in international forums, isolating the country when it can least afford it.
In sum, the consequences of arbitrary arrests are systemic, far-reaching, and self-perpetuating. They not only dismantle opposition in the short term but also corrode the principles of democratic governance, suppress civil society, intensify polarization, and tarnish the countryโs global standing. The longer this pattern continues, the steeper the climb toward restoring trust, stability, and inclusive political participation becomes.
The way out
How can Bangladesh overcome the chilling wave of arbitrary arrests, political repression, and the deepening fractures in its society?
The answer lies in restoring the very foundation of democracy: a free, fair, and inclusive election. The current climate, marked by detentions of students, grassroots leaders, intellectuals, and even respected former bureaucrats, has paralyzed political life and created a vacuum of leadership. Without a legitimate mechanism for citizens to voice their preferences, political engagement is reduced to clandestine resistance, and public trust in institutions collapses.
An inclusive election would provide a structured and legitimate channel for political participation, allowing opposition parties and civic actors to operate without fear of persecution. It would reintroduce accountability to a government that currently sustains itself through repression rather than consensus. By ensuring that all parties, including those currently targeted, can compete freely, Bangladesh can signal a commitment to due process, political plurality, and the rule of law.
Such an election would also serve as a societal reset. The culture of fear, which now silences activists and intellectuals, can begin to dissipate as citizens witness that dissent and debate are no longer criminalized.
Resentment and underground opposition, which grow when voices are suppressed, could instead be channeled through democratic processes. Furthermore, an inclusive electoral process would restore Bangladeshโs credibility internationally, signaling that the country is serious about human rights and democratic norms.
Ultimately, no amount of policing, arrests, or intimidation can substitute for political legitimacy. Only by opening the doors to meaningful, participatory elections can Bangladesh begin to heal from the erosion of its democratic institutions. Without this step, the cycle of fear, exclusion, and arbitrary arrests will persist, leaving the nation trapped in paralysis and political instability.
English