Bangladesh Defense
Saif
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2024
- Messages
- 15,574
- Reaction score
- 7,889
- Nation
- Axis Group
Hasina's trial and future politics of Awami League
One can imagine a scenario. A once-elected Prime Minister ruled the country with immense authority for years. She is overthrown in an uprising. Accusations of crimes against humanity are leveled against her, and she is sentenced to death. She is being taken to the execution stage. On her way...
en.prothomalo.com
Hasina's trial and future politics of Awami League
One can imagine a scenario. A once-elected Prime Minister ruled the country with immense authority for years. She is overthrown in an uprising. Accusations of crimes against humanity are leveled against her, and she is sentenced to death. She is being taken to the execution stage. On her way, she wonders—what is her crime? This reflection is echoed in the work of the English poet Robert Browning. His poem The Patriot conveys a message: a patriot who is celebrated one day may face downfall the next.
A simple Bengali translation of a portion of the poem reads:
"Soaked in rain, I run the path to the execution ground, my hands tied tightly behind me, I feel them being cut, I suppose blood is also flowing from my brow, whoever wills it throws stones at me, this is the fruit of my deeds in a year.
Such is my arrival and departure! Such is the result of my year’s work."
The resonance of this is also found in one of Nazrul’s songs: “Today’s king may beg tomorrow, no one stays equal forever.” History is full of examples of majestic rises and tragic falls, yet few seem to learn from it.
The International Crimes Tribunal-1 in Dhaka has sentenced former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to death. She is not in the country; she is in New Delhi. The Indian government has given her safe refuge. She will not return to Dhaka to face the sentence. In audio and video messages, she has expressed her determination to return in the guise of a victor. She still considers herself the elected Prime Minister and believes she was ousted through a conspiracy.
She is the leader of a political party named the Awami League, which is over 76 years old. Sheikh Hasina has been the party president for nearly 47 years. As an opposition leader and Prime Minister, she has been at the centre of power for almost 27 years. Even though she has lost executive authority, she remains at the forefront of political discourse. Despite criticism, she is almost god-like within the party, with no equal. Even 15 months after leaving the country, the Awami League is synonymous with her. The question arises: what is the future of the Awami League in this situation?
There are many examples, both domestically and abroad, of individuals or parties regaining ground after setbacks. Can the Awami League once again dominate the political landscape? This question emerges because, when the head of a highly personalised party is absent, there is uncertainty about whether the party can survive without them.
On 25 January 1975, through the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, one-man rule was established in the country. That person was Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the architect of the Bangladesh movement, affectionately called Bangabandhu by the people. The roles of leader Mujib and ruler Mujib could not be measured on the same scale. Despite his immense popularity, he could not deliver good governance. After three years, the political landscape had changed. On 15 August, 1975, he was killed in a military coup, yet his party could not respond effectively.
After Sheikh Mujib’s death, the Awami League eventually managed to rise again. This was possible partly because the rulers of that time were somewhat accommodating; they did not ban the party. In 2025, however, the Awami League’s activities were banned. The current rulers are not as lenient toward the party as those who governed after 1975. If the restrictions are not lifted, the Awami League’s prospects of returning are slim. The question is whether the party can, through political and diplomatic processes, create enough pressure to regain the opportunity to operate openly.
It is worth noting that the initial demand was not to ban the Awami League. The demand was the trial of 'crimes against humanity'. Suddenly, the situation changed. When a group of newly formed NCP activists and supporters blocked roads and advanced toward the chief adviser’s residence, Jamuna, the government issued an executive order banning the Awami League’s activities until the next election.
Since the election commission operates under government influence, it promptly suspended the party’s registration and removed the Awami League’s 'boat' symbol from the list of electoral symbols. Now, many other parties are speaking in the same tone. No one is willing to take the risk of publicly defending the Awami League’s right to political activity. However, some still speak in soft tones about the 1972 Constitution, the spirit of the Liberation War, or keeping Sheikh Mujib’s portrait on their office walls.
If a political party believes it follows a doctrine, it is difficult to eradicate it. The biggest example is Jamaat-e-Islami. The party was banned four times—twice in Pakistan and twice in Bangladesh. In 1953, a tribunal even sentenced its leader, Maulana Maududi, to death on charges of inciting anti-Ahmadiyya riots. None of this eliminated the party. Jamaat remains alive and functional.
When a party is denied the chance to operate openly, or considers open activity too risky, it often goes underground and engages in various covert actions—carrying out surprise attacks, planting bombs, committing arson. We have not forgotten the Purba Banglar Sarbahara Party or Jasad’s Biplobi Ganobahini. Following that path, Awami League members are now conducting similar activities in different places, disrupting public life by declaring lockdowns.
A major criticism against the Awami League is that they do not acknowledge any mistakes on their part. They show no remorse or sense of conscience. As a result, a large segment of society’s anger against them is growing. It is also true that no political party in this country has had the courage to admit its mistakes once in government. They all consider themselves infallible.
After August 1975, many members of the Awami League were arrested, some went underground, and some even went to India. After the Liberation War, examples were set by leaders and activists of the BAKSAL, formed by the Awami League, NAP, and CPB, who went to India. These included Kader Siddiqui, Shamim Osman, Sheikh Selim, Mostafa Mohsin Montu, Nurul Islam Nahid, Mujahidul Islam Selim, Monayem Sarkar, SM Yusuf, Obaidul Quader, among others. Once again, we see that many have gone to India, which they consider a safe refuge. The Awami League has maintained a long-standing rapport with India, and this equation does not change even when the Indian government changes.
Will the Awami League always remain a party dependent on India? This does not seem unusual. If there can be pro-China, pro-Russia, or pro-Pakistan parties in this country, why not a pro-India party? It is true that the Awami League has a strong diplomatic position with India. Whether the party will be able to operate openly in politics soon depends largely on international pressure, especially the stance of India and its global allies. In this context, the demand for an ‘inclusive election’ could provide legitimacy for the Awami League.
#Mohiuddin Ahmad is a writer and researcher
One can imagine a scenario. A once-elected Prime Minister ruled the country with immense authority for years. She is overthrown in an uprising. Accusations of crimes against humanity are leveled against her, and she is sentenced to death. She is being taken to the execution stage. On her way, she wonders—what is her crime? This reflection is echoed in the work of the English poet Robert Browning. His poem The Patriot conveys a message: a patriot who is celebrated one day may face downfall the next.
A simple Bengali translation of a portion of the poem reads:
"Soaked in rain, I run the path to the execution ground, my hands tied tightly behind me, I feel them being cut, I suppose blood is also flowing from my brow, whoever wills it throws stones at me, this is the fruit of my deeds in a year.
Such is my arrival and departure! Such is the result of my year’s work."
The resonance of this is also found in one of Nazrul’s songs: “Today’s king may beg tomorrow, no one stays equal forever.” History is full of examples of majestic rises and tragic falls, yet few seem to learn from it.
The International Crimes Tribunal-1 in Dhaka has sentenced former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to death. She is not in the country; she is in New Delhi. The Indian government has given her safe refuge. She will not return to Dhaka to face the sentence. In audio and video messages, she has expressed her determination to return in the guise of a victor. She still considers herself the elected Prime Minister and believes she was ousted through a conspiracy.
She is the leader of a political party named the Awami League, which is over 76 years old. Sheikh Hasina has been the party president for nearly 47 years. As an opposition leader and Prime Minister, she has been at the centre of power for almost 27 years. Even though she has lost executive authority, she remains at the forefront of political discourse. Despite criticism, she is almost god-like within the party, with no equal. Even 15 months after leaving the country, the Awami League is synonymous with her. The question arises: what is the future of the Awami League in this situation?
There are many examples, both domestically and abroad, of individuals or parties regaining ground after setbacks. Can the Awami League once again dominate the political landscape? This question emerges because, when the head of a highly personalised party is absent, there is uncertainty about whether the party can survive without them.
On 25 January 1975, through the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, one-man rule was established in the country. That person was Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the architect of the Bangladesh movement, affectionately called Bangabandhu by the people. The roles of leader Mujib and ruler Mujib could not be measured on the same scale. Despite his immense popularity, he could not deliver good governance. After three years, the political landscape had changed. On 15 August, 1975, he was killed in a military coup, yet his party could not respond effectively.
After Sheikh Mujib’s death, the Awami League eventually managed to rise again. This was possible partly because the rulers of that time were somewhat accommodating; they did not ban the party. In 2025, however, the Awami League’s activities were banned. The current rulers are not as lenient toward the party as those who governed after 1975. If the restrictions are not lifted, the Awami League’s prospects of returning are slim. The question is whether the party can, through political and diplomatic processes, create enough pressure to regain the opportunity to operate openly.
It is worth noting that the initial demand was not to ban the Awami League. The demand was the trial of 'crimes against humanity'. Suddenly, the situation changed. When a group of newly formed NCP activists and supporters blocked roads and advanced toward the chief adviser’s residence, Jamuna, the government issued an executive order banning the Awami League’s activities until the next election.
Since the election commission operates under government influence, it promptly suspended the party’s registration and removed the Awami League’s 'boat' symbol from the list of electoral symbols. Now, many other parties are speaking in the same tone. No one is willing to take the risk of publicly defending the Awami League’s right to political activity. However, some still speak in soft tones about the 1972 Constitution, the spirit of the Liberation War, or keeping Sheikh Mujib’s portrait on their office walls.
If a political party believes it follows a doctrine, it is difficult to eradicate it. The biggest example is Jamaat-e-Islami. The party was banned four times—twice in Pakistan and twice in Bangladesh. In 1953, a tribunal even sentenced its leader, Maulana Maududi, to death on charges of inciting anti-Ahmadiyya riots. None of this eliminated the party. Jamaat remains alive and functional.
When a party is denied the chance to operate openly, or considers open activity too risky, it often goes underground and engages in various covert actions—carrying out surprise attacks, planting bombs, committing arson. We have not forgotten the Purba Banglar Sarbahara Party or Jasad’s Biplobi Ganobahini. Following that path, Awami League members are now conducting similar activities in different places, disrupting public life by declaring lockdowns.
A major criticism against the Awami League is that they do not acknowledge any mistakes on their part. They show no remorse or sense of conscience. As a result, a large segment of society’s anger against them is growing. It is also true that no political party in this country has had the courage to admit its mistakes once in government. They all consider themselves infallible.
After August 1975, many members of the Awami League were arrested, some went underground, and some even went to India. After the Liberation War, examples were set by leaders and activists of the BAKSAL, formed by the Awami League, NAP, and CPB, who went to India. These included Kader Siddiqui, Shamim Osman, Sheikh Selim, Mostafa Mohsin Montu, Nurul Islam Nahid, Mujahidul Islam Selim, Monayem Sarkar, SM Yusuf, Obaidul Quader, among others. Once again, we see that many have gone to India, which they consider a safe refuge. The Awami League has maintained a long-standing rapport with India, and this equation does not change even when the Indian government changes.
Will the Awami League always remain a party dependent on India? This does not seem unusual. If there can be pro-China, pro-Russia, or pro-Pakistan parties in this country, why not a pro-India party? It is true that the Awami League has a strong diplomatic position with India. Whether the party will be able to operate openly in politics soon depends largely on international pressure, especially the stance of India and its global allies. In this context, the demand for an ‘inclusive election’ could provide legitimacy for the Awami League.
#Mohiuddin Ahmad is a writer and researcher
