[🇧🇩] Everything about the interim government and its actions

[Saif]

Interim govt failing to maintain neutrality on some issues: Fakhrul

BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir today urged the interim government to perform its duties impartially, alleging it of failing to maintain neutrality on some issues

www.thedailystar.net

Interim govt failing to maintain neutrality on some issues: Fakhrul

File photo

BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir today urged the interim government to perform its duties impartially, alleging it of failing to maintain neutrality on some issues.

"Yesterday, in an interview, I said if the interim government can't remain impartial, a neutral government will be required during the elections. There is a reason for making this statement. We observe that the interim government is unable to maintain neutrality on several issues," he said while addressing a discussion today.

He urged the interim government to carry out its responsibilities impartially and address the problems the country is currently facing.

The Shaheed Asad Parishad organised the discussion at the Jatiya Press Club to mark the 56th martyrdom anniversary of student leader Asaduzzaman, who became a symbol of resistance during the mass uprising against the then Pakistani autocratic ruler Ayub Khan in 1969.

On January 20, 1969, Asad, a hero of the 1969 mass upsurge, was shot and killed by the Pakistani police during a protest rally near Dhaka Medical College and Hospital (DMCH).

Fakhrul said the government should arrange the election as soon as possible after carrying out the necessary minimum reforms. "The government to be formed through that election would be able to fulfill the commitments made to people and work to meet the public's aspirations."

The BNP leader claimed that his party is seeking the election not merely to go to power, but because he fears that evil forces may exploit the situation if the election is unnecessarily delayed.

He also said all political parties agree on the necessity of holding elections, as it is the gateway to the democratic system.

Fakhrul said some people are saying the government should hold the election only after reforms. "But, should we wait four to five years or until the reforms are completed? People would be deprived of their voting rights for another long period."​

 

[Saif]

Interim govt will restore people’s voting rights: Moyeen hopes

Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Standing Committee Member Dr Abdul Moyeen Khan on Wednesday said they believe that the Interim Government will bring back the voting rights of the people. “The current interim government is the government of the people. We believe that the important respons

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Interim govt will restore people’s voting rights: Moyeen hopes
BSS
Published :
Jan 22, 2025 18:39
Updated :
Jan 22, 2025 18:39

Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Standing Committee Member Dr Abdul Moyeen Khan on Wednesday said they believe that the Interim Government will bring back the voting rights of the people.

“The current interim government is the government of the people. We believe that the important responsibility entrusted with them for restoring the voting rights of the people will be materialized,” he hoped.

Moyeen Khan said this after paying floral wreath at the grave of BNP founder Shaheed President Ziaur Rahman at Sher-e-Bangla Nagar here with leaders and activists of the UK BNP chapter this afternoon.

UK BNP Vice President Abed Raja was present among others.

Moyeen Khan said BNP will reestablish the democracy for which Bangladesh became independent in 1971.

Calling upon the government to hold national elections as soon as possible, the senior BNP leader said, “I hope, the government will quickly complete the reforms in important sectors and return state power to the representatives of the people.”

“That’s why BNP is cooperating with the government in every possible way so that it can properly fulfill its important responsibility for restoring the rights of the people,” he said.

Stating that the Awami League leaders was forced to flee due to the student-people movement, Moyeen Khan said, their fleeing is not new, like 2024 they fled in 1971, leaving the people at gunpoint of Pakistani occupying forces.

The senior BNP leaders said that the Awami League government cheated with the people of Bangladesh for the past 15 years, although they claimed to be a pro-independence force.

“In fact, Awami League is a force against the country’s independence,” he said.

Moyeen Khan said AL killed democracy after independence and formed one-party rule in 1975.

“Awami League established an unwritten BAKSAL in the country in the last 15 years,” he said.​

 

[Saif]

A reminder of the nearly unwinnable hand Yunus was dealt

A sentiment has taken root in Bangladesh: Yunus is an honest man with good intentions.

www.thedailystar.net

A reminder of the nearly unwinnable hand Yunus was dealt

The people of Bangladesh have little choice but to place their faith in a man who, throughout his storied career, has rarely disappointed his nation. Photo: CA Press Wing
History shows that the aftermath of popular revolts—particularly those that overthrow authoritarian regimes—is marked by chaos and uncertainty. What Bangladesh is currently facing—economic instability on pocketbook issues, such as exorbitant prices of essentials, a feeble investment climate, and a war of words among political stakeholders with competing vested interests—is a predictable symptom of a messy but necessary political transition.

In reality, that transition is underway—not through an overhaul of how politics functions in Bangladesh but within the pre-existing paradigm of a flawed system, through gradual, incremental steps towards democracy. Finding the sweet spot that constitutes a liberal, multi-party ecosystem will take decades, not months. It depends on both a good-faith commitment and the implementation of that commitment by political actors through self-reflection, public policies, and rhetoric that differ extensively from what Bangladesh has experienced in the past.

Yunus leads a team that, for all its flaws, has shown a willingness to listen to criticism rather than suppress dissent. However, testing the public's patience is the government's failure to adequately respond to those criticisms by matching words with actions. The public's patience is considerable, but it is not infinite and will inevitably reach its limits. Yunus' announcement that elections will take place sometime between the end of 2025 and mid-2026 has helped calm nerves slightly, offering a skeletal electoral roadmap.

Many segments of society, silenced for 15 years, are voicing their frustrations on a range of issues without the fear of reprisal. This sudden release of anger, while cathartic for some, has added to the government's woes. A vested quarter, still convinced that Hasina's political chapter is far from over, are intent on breeding chaos and disrupting the brittle equilibrium defining the social contract between an anxious population and an inexperienced government.

A government, neither elected nor politically sharp yet burdened with the task of navigating a minefield of expectations, frustrations, and entrenched divisions, is far from ideal. However, the current situation simply reflects the raw, anarchic truth of a nation still trying to figure out its next steps.

A sentiment has taken root in Bangladesh: Yunus is an honest man with good intentions, a philosopher who has wooed international leaders every time he has travelled abroad since taking the reins of government. At the recent World Economic Forum conference, he was in fine form. In Bangladesh, though, he seems out of his comfort zone, struggling to steer the ship of state—a ship he did not want to captain.

There are many steps that, as chief adviser, Yunus could and should have taken but has not. Critics have examined these shortcomings in depth. But it is the nation's duty to continuously remind itself of the context in which Yunus finds himself in the position he occupies today and why he deserves a fairer assessment.

To begin with, consider how Yunus assumed office. He was preparing either to remain abroad or return to Bangladesh to face imprisonment under a regime that sought retribution. That regime, led by a prime minister with a personal vendetta against Yunus, resented the universal respect he commanded. His stature was an insult to the fragile ego of an autocrat.

In the aftermath of August 5, a group of young student conveners, most in their 20s, approached Yunus with an emotional appeal. They summoned him back to Dhaka from Paris, delivering an unambiguous message: you have to return to take the role of head of government in Bangladesh. And they were right.

Frankly, there was no other option than Yunus. At that moment, and even today, no one else other than him had—or has—the moral legitimacy to unify a fractured Bangladesh. Yunus brought an aura of hope, a balm for a country reeling from weeks of state-sponsored carnage. Mob violence still occurred, but viewed contextually, things could have been much worse. Nonetheless, being a symbol of national unity is one thing. Governing is another matter entirely.

His advisory council has attracted valid criticism due to the underperformance of certain individuals. According to Yunus's own admissions in a candid conversation with New Age editor Nurul Kabir, he was presented with a shortlist of names—likely suggested by the student conveners—and chose individuals he knew personally. Unlike previous chief advisers of caretaker governments, who had the luxury of time to prepare and the clarity of purpose, Yunus inherited a state apparatus with neither.

The caretaker governments of 1991, 1996, and 2001 operated under three-month mandates to organise elections. They benefitted from defined goals, established timelines, and institutional preparation. In contrast, Yunus was tasked with a much broader and less defined mission: to reform a system riddled with corruption, dismantle entrenched authoritarian structures, unite political parties, hold elections, and manage the day-to-day affairs of the state. There was no roadmap, no consensus on priorities, and no clarity on the duration of his administration.

Most members of his advisory council have no experience in government, including Yunus himself, as he often reminds the public. He could not appoint figures closely tied to the Awami League or BNP, nor could he include anyone seen as ideologically extreme to the left or the right. This resulted in a team that lacks administrative skills and ideological cohesion. While these shortcomings are real, they reflect the impossible deck of cards Yunus was dealt.

The politics Yunus must navigate are no less fraught. The BNP demands elections as soon as possible with minimal reforms, pushing the idea that an elected government is urgently needed. Meanwhile, frontline student leaders have begun to display signs of inexperience, veering into unnecessary ideological debates, such as calls to amend Bangladesh's state ideology, rather than focusing on designing a coherent policy vision for the future. Activism, for all its courage and energy, has not translated into the kind of maturity needed post the uprising.

Then there are the religion-based factions, including Jamaat-e-Islami, which seek to steer Bangladesh in a direction likely at odds with a sizeable segment of the country. Considering all this and more, Yunus has become an umbrella shielding a nation from local and international conspiracies, striving to cocoon citizens from conflict with one another to the best of his ability, battered by competing political, ideological, and generational storms.

Compounding these challenges is the bureaucracy. The civil service, entrenched in inefficiency and outdated practices, has become a barrier to both reform and daily administration. Yunus has faced a public service designed to resist change, still bearing the influence of the previous regime. From law enforcement's failure to carry out its responsibilities to the continued dominance of syndicates, the bureaucracy has proven to be an almost insurmountable obstacle.

The greatest challenge lies ahead. The recommendations from various reform commissions must now be either agreed upon, ditched, or left for the elected government to pursue, requiring negotiation among political stakeholders. Yunus has taken on the responsibility of building consensus—an extremely difficult task. He has positioned his government as a facilitator without its own agenda, suggesting that those expected to lead Bangladesh after the elections should take the wheel in determining what is best for the country.

On paper, this approach seems inclusive—some might even call it democratic. The real question, however, is whether an 84-year-old man, who has lived a remarkable life, achieved nearly everything one can aspire to, and brought international recognition to Bangladesh, can rise to meet the moment and what is arguably the biggest test of his life. The people of Bangladesh have little choice but to place their faith in a man who, throughout his storied career, has rarely disappointed his nation. Criticise his government we will, but place our trust in him we must. Good luck, Dr Muhammad Yunus.

Mir Aftabuddin Ahmed is a public policy columnist.​

 

[Saif]

Anti-discrimination student movement blames govt for student violence

Recently, there has been an increase in inter-institutional conflict over minor incidents. Ordinary students and ordinary people are the victims of these sudden conflicts. In this case, the anti-discrimination student movement thinks that there is a lack of management of the interim government and

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Anti-discrimination student movement blames govt for student violence
FE ONLINE DESK
Published :
Jan 27, 2025 23:12
Updated :
Jan 27, 2025 23:12

Recently, there has been an increase in inter-institutional conflict over minor incidents. Ordinary students and ordinary people are the victims of these sudden conflicts. In this case, the anti-discrimination student movement thinks that there is a lack of management of the interim government and law enforcement agencies.

The concern was expressed in a message sent by Zahid Ahsan, Cell Secretary (Office Sale) of, the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement on Monday night, according to local media reports.

On Sunday, Dhaka College and Dhaka University students clashed several times. So far, more than 50 students of both institutions as well as some pedestrians have been injured in the incident.

The message also said that the police brutally attacked the students including Muhammad Rakib, the central executive member of the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement, and seriously injured them.

The anti-discrimination student movement strongly condemns and protests the indiscriminate attack on the students by the police. In the current situation, the government will have to be more active and initiative to maintain an overall fair environment in the educational institutions.​

 

[Saif]

Whom do the bureaucrats serve?

The existing bureaucratic culture in Bangladesh is holding the government back.

www.thedailystar.net

Whom do the bureaucrats serve?
Existing bureaucratic culture is holding the government back

VISUAL: STAR

When the Awami League government fell on August 5, 2024, following weeks of mass movement, there was a widespread sense of hope that better days lay ahead. The interim government took office on August 8, promising an efficient, pro-people governance system in line with the spirit of the July uprising. Unfortunately, over five and a half months on, it is struggling to even get on the track of that promise, thanks largely to a non-cooperative, past-bound bureaucracy.

According to a recent report by Samakal, several advisers of the interim government have expressed frustration at being unable to carry out their duties properly due to a lack of support from the bureaucrats. Adviser Nahid Islam even spoke about this publicly. As a result, the government has failed to complete 70 percent of the tasks it had set for itself, which is staggering. These unfinished tasks include crucial issues such as the posting of deputy commissioners, withdrawal of politically motivated cases, distribution of free school textbooks, procurement of necessary equipment at various government offices, etc—all matters that needed prompt response.

Apparently, bureaucrats are still being sluggish, resistant, and mostly "strategic" in their work knowing the transient nature of this non-political administration; they are cautious to avoid potential trouble when a political party comes to power through election. Strong resistance is also coming from those who benefited from various perks under the Awami League regime; there are allegations that these officials are intentionally creating bottlenecks for the current administration.

As frustrating as this situation is, it is not entirely unexpected. Bureaucracy in Bangladesh has historically been politicised, used by the ruling party of the day to varying extents. This abuse peaked under the Awami League's rule, which politicised almost every level of government and provided perks and benefits to officials in exchange for loyalty. In return, these officials helped it maintain its authoritarian grip, stifling democratic practices and good governance. This led to a bureaucratic system so entrenched in corruption that any indication of change or reform triggers adverse, almost visceral reactions from bureaucrats fearing they might lose their positions of power and comfort.

Today, some of the old players may have changed, but the old system remains firmly in place. A properly functioning government requires a supportive and efficient bureaucracy. To achieve this, our outdated bureaucratic system must be dismantled to make way for a healthy, accountable system. Bureaucrats must realise that their job is not to pander to the rulers, but the people—the taxpayers. They must check their self-serving attitudes and heed the public demand: to uphold the integrity of their duties.​