[🇧🇩] Press Freedom in Bangladesh

[Saif]

No govt has ever accepted critical journalism: Mahfuz Anam

The Daily Star editor says the only institution that will speak the truth is an independent media

www.thedailystar.net

No govt has ever accepted critical journalism: Mahfuz Anam

The Daily Star editor says the only institution that will speak the truth is an independent media

Photo Courtesy: Prothom Alo

The Daily Star Editor Mahfuz Anam today said that in Bangladesh's 53-year history, no media organisation had ever faced an arson attack like the recent one targeting The Daily Star and Prothom Alo.

"For the very first time, the offices of Prothom Alo and The Daily Star have been set on fire. Why? What crime did we commit?" he said. "I would request everyone to genuinely ask this question," he said.

Mahfuz Anam made the remarks at a views-exchange meeting with editors and senior journalists at a Dhaka hotel, held ahead of BNP Acting Chairman Tarique Rahman's return to Bangladesh.

He urged political parties to recognise and accept critical journalism as a fundamental pillar of good governance.

"The first step must be freedom of expression," he said, adding that the most important political commitment should be ensuring freedom of critical expression. "Freedom of expression exists. But I will criticise you -- that is freedom."

The veteran editor observed that political leaders often maintain friendly relations with the media while in opposition, but the real test comes after assuming power.

"Everyone wants to see whether you will accept constructive criticism after coming to office," he said. "In 53 years, the biggest lesson is that no government has ever accepted critical journalism. I hope that in a new Bangladesh, you will accept this critical journalism."

Mahfuz Anam stressed that critical journalism is not merely about safeguarding press freedom but is essential for effective governance.

"Critical journalism is not only necessary for freedom of journalism; it is an opportunity for good governance," he said. "Why would I criticise you using false information? Bureaucracy will never tell you the truth, intelligence agencies will never tell you the truth. Even your party colleagues will not tell you the truth. The only institution that will speak the truth is an independent media."​

 

[Saif]

All identified individuals will face legal action: Press Secretary

Shafiqul Alam, Press Secretary to the Chief Adviser, has stated that 31 people have been arrested so far in connection with the attacks and arson at the offices of Prothom Alo and The Daily Star. He added that everyone else who is identified in connection with the incident will be brought under...

en.prothomalo.com

All identified individuals will face legal action: Press Secretary

Special Correspondent Dhaka
Updated: 24 Dec 2025, 19: 39

Shafiqul Alam, Press Secretary to the Chief Adviser, announces the decisions of the Advisory Council meeting. Foreign Service Academy, Dhaka. 24 December.

Shafiqul Alam, Press Secretary to the Chief Adviser, has stated that 31 people have been arrested so far in connection with the attacks and arson at the offices of Prothom Alo and The Daily Star.

He added that everyone else who is identified in connection with the incident will be brought under the law.

The Press Secretary made these remarks on Wednesday afternoon while responding to journalists’ questions at a press conference held at the Foreign Service Academy in the capital.

The conference was organised to announce the decisions of the Interim Government’s Advisory Council meeting held earlier in the day. Apart from the meeting’s decisions, journalists also asked the Press Secretary questions about other recent events.

Late Thursday night, the country’s leading newspaper Prothom Alo became the target of a deliberate and organised attack by extremist militants. After vandalising and looting, the attackers set fire to the Prothom Alo office. On the same night, the Daily Star office was also vandalised and looted before being set on fire. When journalists went to the Daily Star office to protect staff, Nurul Kabir, President of the Editors’ Council, was harassed. Many have described the incident as a “dark day for the media” and have expressed strong protest and condemnation.

At a press conference, in response to a question about the attacks on Prothom Alo and The Daily Star, Press Secretary Shafiqul Alam said that 31 people have been arrested in connection with the incidents.

He added that arrests were made after examining videos and photos, and that substantial evidence has been collected and cases filed. Everyone else who can be identified will also be brought under the law.

Responding to a question about the investigation into the murder of Shahid Sharif Osman Bin Hadi of the Inqilab Moncho and the arrest of the accused, the Press Secretary said that the government is giving the highest priority to the case and that all relevant security agencies are working on it.

Press Secretary Shafiqul Alam stated that the Advisory Council meeting discussed several issues, including the brutal killing of a garment worker named Dipu Chandra Das in Valuka, Mymensingh, over allegations of religious defamation, in which he was beaten to death and later hanged from a tree and set on fire.

He said that Education Adviser CR Abrar visited Dipu Chandra Das’s home and assured the family that the entire government stands with them. All necessary measures will be taken. The law adviser also stated that the case will be tried under the Speedy Trial Tribunal.​

 

[Saif]

Attacks on media houses, unruly politics, and the new democratic risk

The smoke that rose from Karwan Bazar during the early hours of December 19 did not begin with fire.

www.thedailystar.net

Attacks on media houses, unruly politics, and the new democratic risk

'The fire in Karwan Bazar was not just an attack on two newspaper buildings; it was also an attack on press freedom.' FILE PHOTO: MD ABBAS

The smoke that rose from Karwan Bazar during the early hours of December 19 did not begin with fire. It started with grief, or so it seemed, apparently over the tragic killing of young leader Sharif Osman Hadi that shook the entire nation. In reality, that grief was exploited by vested quarters to do what many believe they wanted to do for long. Thus, the attacks on the offices of Prothom Alo and The Daily Star, along with the unruly behaviour directed at New Age editor Nurul Kabir, were not spontaneous outbursts borne out of mourning. They were the result of a political atmosphere in which anger is weaponised and violence is quietly rationalised as moral action. Hadi's killing became the emotional trigger, but the target was the press. That shift tells us something deeply unsettling about how dissent, grief, and power are being managed today.

When the state cannot clearly and forcefully defend journalists, it sends a message that some forms of violence are tolerable, even if they are officially condemned. Democracy does not collapse all at once. It erodes slowly, through moments when the state hesitates and non-state actors step forward to fill the space.

The most troubling feature of these attacks is that they were carried out by groups that do not formally control the state, yet claim moral authority over it. These actors claim to defend national interest, religious values, or popular sentiment. In reality, they operate outside the law while masquerading as patriots or devotees. This is a classic pattern seen in fragile democracies. When unruly groups begin to decide who is loyal and who is a traitor, the rule of law is replaced by sheer misjudgement.

Hadi's killing intensified this process. His death created a powerful emotional narrative, especially among a section of young people who already distrust institutions. Instead of channelling that grief towards demands for investigation, accountability, and reform, influential voices redirected it towards media houses. They were accused of distortion, bias, or silence. Whether these accusations are fair or not became irrelevant. What mattered was that the press had become a symbol, and symbols are easily burned.

This redirection did not happen organically. A significant role was played by online figures operating from outside the country. These digital actors speak loudly but risk nothing. From safe distances in Europe or North America, they frame events in moral absolutes and encourage confrontation. They do not face tear gas, arrest, or retaliation. Those consequences fall on young men on the streets, many of whom believe they are acting heroically. In this sense, the violence against media houses was due as much to local anger as to outsourced radicalisation.

At the heart of this lies a dangerous misunderstanding of how media power actually works. Many attackers seem to believe that newspapers possess an almost magical ability to shape public opinion and fate, as if a single headline can sway the thoughts of millions overnight. This belief comes from an outdated view of communication, one that treats audiences as passive and the media as all-powerful. Modern research shows the opposite. Media influence is limited, filtered through personal beliefs, social networks, and digital algorithms. People choose what they consume. They argue, reject, remix, and ignore.

In today's Bangladesh, newspapers are no longer the dominant source of information. Social media platforms shape opinion far more aggressively and far less responsibly. Rumours spread faster than facts, and outrage travels further than evidence. If the genuine concern were manipulation, attention would be directed towards unregulated digital ecosystems. Burning newspaper offices does nothing to solve that problem. It only creates fear and silence.

Yet, defending the press does not mean denying its weaknesses. Major media houses in Bangladesh have often failed to communicate effectively with the public, particularly with younger generations. They often speak in formal language, remain distant during crises, and assume that credibility speaks for itself. In a polarised environment, that assumption can be fatal. When accusations of being "anti-state" circulated, media institutions responded slowly and defensively. They did not explain their editorial processes. They did not humanise their tone. They did not actively engage in online narratives that were turning hostile.

This gap made it easier for non-state actors to define the media before the media could define itself. Silence was interpreted as arrogance or guilt. In an age where perception moves faster than truth, that silence became dangerous.

To understand why this moment matters, it is helpful to consider a simple model of media attacks by non-state actors. The process usually unfolds in five stages. First, a triggering event occurs, often involving death, injustice, or humiliation. Hadi's killing fits this stage. Second, emotional narratives spread rapidly, amplified by social media and external influencers. Third, the media is framed as an enemy, accused of betrayal or distortion. Fourth, symbolic violence is carried out against media institutions to demonstrate power and unity. Ultimately, fear sets in, leading to self-censorship and a weakening of accountability.

This model shows why such attacks are not isolated incidents. They are structural threats to democracy. Bangladesh is now witnessing the emergence of non-state actors hell-bent on threatening media freedom.

The state's response at this stage is crucial. Condemnation without enforcement is not enough. The interim government must make it unmistakably clear that violence against the press is a red line. That means arrests, prosecutions, and public accountability, regardless of who the perpetrators claim to represent.

At the same time, media institutions must change. They cannot afford to remain insulated silos. They must engage directly with citizens, especially young people. They must explain why journalism matters, how stories are verified, and where mistakes are acknowledged and corrected. Trust cannot be assumed. It must be rebuilt, patiently and publicly.

Hadi's death should have led to national reflection and institutional reform. Instead, it was weaponised to justify attacks on the very institutions that could have helped uncover the truth and demand justice. That inversion is the real tragedy. When grief is turned into violence and journalism becomes the enemy, democracy stands on fragile ground.

The fire in Karwan Bazar was not just an attack on two newspaper buildings; it was also an attack on press freedom. It was a signal that showed how quickly anger can be redirected, how easily non-state actors can shape political action, and how vulnerable democratic institutions become when both the state and the media fail to act decisively. If this moment is not taken seriously, the next crisis will be worse. And the subsequent fire may not stop at media houses.

Dr S M Rezwan-Ul-Alam is associate professor of media, communication, and journalism at North South University.​

 

[Saif]

Unity urged to remove barriers to free media

Senior journalists at a media convention on Saturday called for unity in the journalist community to remove both legal and extra-legal impediments to democratic freedom of the mass media.

www.newagebd.net

Unity urged to remove barriers to free media
Staff Correspondent 17 January, 2026, 15:30

Senior journalists and newspaper owners along with their fellows pose for a group photo at the Media Convention 2026, organised to protest against attacks on freedom of expression, at the Krishibid Institute auditorium in Dhaka on Saturday. | Sony Ramany

Senior journalists at a media convention on Saturday called for unity in the journalist community to remove both legal and extra-legal impediments to democratic freedom of the mass media.

They said that independent journalism was not a privilege but a constitutional necessity for democracy, accountability, and social justice.

Speakers made the call at the Media Convention 2026, jointly organised by the Newspaper Owners’ Association of Bangladesh and the Editors’ Council at the Krishibid Institution, Bangladesh auditorium in Dhaka.

Journalists also stressed the need for internal reforms within the media houses to strengthen professionalism, accountability, and ethical standards.

They emphasised the importance of establishing standardised media outlets with transparent ownership, fair practices, and clear editorial policies to ensure credible and responsible journalism.

According to The Daily Star editor Mahfuz Anam, independent journalism is a constitutional necessity while he warned that treating the media as a purely profit-driven industry would erode public trust in the media and democratic values.

Journalism, he said, is a social service rooted in ethics, honesty, and integrity, noting that the constitution protected only two independent institutions — the judiciary and the media — because of their critical role in safeguarding democracy and citizen rights.

Mahfuz urged the judiciary to ensure that powers such as contempt of court were not misused to silence independent journalism, stressing that a free press and an independent judiciary were mutually reinforcing pillars of democracy.

He also called on journalists and editors to uphold the highest ethical and professional standards, cautioning media owners against narrow commercial interests and urging the adoption of clear codes of conduct for media ownership.

Stressing that independent journalism is essential for holding the power to account, he said that the post-July uprising period offered a crucial opportunity to rebuild a democratic, ethical, and courageous media.

Prothom Alo editor Matiur Rahman emphasised an urgent need for unity among journalists across ideological, political and institutional lines.

He said that journalists must stand by one another on issues of press freedom, professional safety and personal security, regardless of difference of opinions.

He warned against assuming that an elected government alone would ensure press freedom, recalling repeated instances of repression under various regimes since the independence in 1971, including the closure of newspapers in 1975 and pressures during both military and civilian governments.

Editors’ Council president and New Age editor Nurul Kabir in his opening address said that journalism driven by democratic aspirations could never be treated as a crime, warning that attacks or attempts to silence media institutions ultimately obstructed the rights of society as a whole.English language tutoring

He said that journalists were committed to democracy, human rights, equality, and a non-communal society.

The use of legal and extra-legal measures, Nurul Kabir cautioned, to suppress democratic institutions reflects a dangerous trend requiring unity and collective resistance.

Referring to recent attacks on The Daily Star and Prothom Alo, Nurul Kabir said that violence was being carried out in the name of democracy during the country’s transition from authoritarian rule following the July uprising.

He alleged the misuse of the movement’s spirit to justify such attacks.

Describing the attack on The Daily Star office as barbaric, he said that trapping journalists inside a building and setting fire around it reflected medieval brutality.

He said that if newspapers and other media outlets cannot function independently or remain active or speak out freely fundamental rights across society will inevitably diminish.

Media development and democratic development, he observed, are deeply interconnected worldwide.

Jai Jai Din editor Shafik Rehman called for professional independence in journalism and the avoidance of personality worship.

Describing journalism as a moral responsibility, he stressed the need for financial and intellectual self-reliance and urged journalists to develop alternative professional skills to avoid compromise.

He also proposed forming a standard committee to set editorial and professional norms.

National Press Club president Hasan Hafiz termed the recent attack on media houses unprecedented and called for ensuring independent journalism in a democratic environment.

Expressing frustration over the non-implementation of the recommendations of the Media Reform Commission, including the enactment of a safety act for journalists, commission chair Kamal Ahmed said that the government would have to take the responsibility for attacks on media and journalists.

Bangladesh Federal Union of Journalists secretary general Kader Gani Chowdhury said that unity was the only path to saving the mass media, urging journalists to overcome divisions and partisan attitudes and resist any attacks on the press.

Dhaka Union of Journalists president Shahidul Islam said that attackers would not dare target the media if journalists were united, warning that division only encouraged repeated attacks.

Broadcast Journalists Centre president Rezwanul Haque said that no government genuinely wanted independent journalism, adding that political affiliation among journalists remained the key obstacle to unity.

Financial Express publisher Syed Nasim Manzur said that ordinary citizens and businesspeople wanted fair and professional media houses that enhanced accountability in the country.

Nari Sangbadik Kendra (women journalists centre) vice-president Monema Sultana said that media houses faced numerous internal problems and required reforms to ensure responsible and professional journalism.

MA Malek, editor of the Chattogram-based daily Azadi, said that blocking genuine journalism created an information vacuum filled by fake news that misled people and increased social instability.

He said that the gathering on journalism was not against anyone but aimed to keep the path of truthful journalism open so that responsible media could operate fearlessly and without obstruction.

Journalists from outside Dhaka, along with editors, publishers, invited media professionals and columnists, also joined the event, which aimed to project a united stance in support of independent, responsible, and courageous journalism.

Earlier in the day, the convention was started with the singing of the national anthem while Bonik Barta editor and Editors’ Council general secretary Dewan Hanif Mahmud conducted the event.​

 

[Saif]

Political pressure, economic insecurity threaten media freedom: Speakers

Speakers at a dialogue on media reform on Tuesday expressed concern over safety, political interference and economic vulnerability of journalists The dialogue, titled “Media Reform in Bangladesh: Between Freedom, Responsibility and Power,” was held at the CIRDAP Auditorium

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Political pressure, economic insecurity threaten media freedom: Speakers

Published :
Jan 27, 2026 23:30
Updated :
Jan 27, 2026 23:30

Speakers at a dialogue on media reform on Tuesday expressed concern over safety, political interference and economic vulnerability of journalists

The dialogue, titled “Media Reform in Bangladesh: Between Freedom, Responsibility and Power,” was held at the CIRDAP Auditorium to discuss key challenges and reform priorities in the mass media sector, UNB reports.

Centre for Governance Studies (CGS) in Dhaka organised the dialogue where speakers warned that the country’s media space is increasingly constrained despite its vital role in a democratic society.

Former head of the Media Reform Commission Kamal Ahmed spoke as the guest of honour.

CGS president Zillur Rahman said despite the Chief Adviser’s rhetoric of “three zeros,” he sees little substance on the ground. Referring to recent arson incidents at the offices of Prothom Alo and The Daily Star and the harassment of a senior editor critical of the government, he questioned the state of media freedom.Online newspaper reader

He also noted that a government representative at a CGS event refused to describe the incidents as “mob attacks,” claiming it would undermine the spirit of the mass uprising.

New Age Editor Nurul Kabir said mobs are generally viewed as chaotic forces, but the attacks he observed were organised and premeditated, alleging government patronage behind them.

He said although the Chief Adviser’s press secretary initially denied the allegations, a subsequent Facebook post contradicted that claim.

He added that corruption in journalism cannot be attributed solely to low pay, noting that some financially well-off journalists are also involved.

“Real journalists question power, those who don’t act as public relations officers,” he said.

Kamal Ahmed criticised the government’s last-minute rush to pass ordinances near the end of its tenure, expressing doubts about their sustainability.

He said recently introduced ordinances on the Information Broadcasting Commission and Media Commission appeared to be patchwork initiatives that lacked proper consultation.

He urged media owners to ensure fair financial benefits for journalists.Personal finance advice

Dhaka University Professor Robaet Ferdous emphasised the need for effective accountability of both parliament and media to maintain checks and balances, warning that the absence of a culture of accountability has weakened democratic oversight.

DU Professor S M Shameem Reza said the media must engage in self-criticism and acknowledge past professional failures to ensure future independence.

He also highlighted issues related to journalists’ salaries, safety, protection laws, the effectiveness of the Press Council and repressive legislation.

Socialist Party of Bangladesh General Secretary Bazlur Rashid Firoz called for the withdrawal of harassing cases against journalists and urgent solutions to their financial crisis, warning against the culture of flattering those in power.

CPB Central Committee member Dr Sajedul Huq Rubel said media freedom often depends on the nature of the ruling political force, adding that while responsibility for provocative speech exists, little action has been taken against the spread of incitement from abroad through social media in recent months.

Executive Editor of Dhaka Tribune Reaz Ahma said the Media Reform Commission had done commendable work despite limited time and resources, but regretted that the government had taken little initiative to implement its recommendations. “Only time will tell how committed the next government will be to media reform,” he said.

Other speakers included Executive Editor of Bangladesh Protidin A K M Manjurul Islam; Head of English Web of Prothom Alo Ayesha Kabir; G-9 General Secretary Dr Sakhawat Hossain Sayantha; University of Dhaka Professor Dr S M Shameem Reza; Special Content Editor of The Daily Star Shamsuddoza Sajen; senior journalist Zahid Newaz Khan; political analyst Zahed Ur Rahman; freelance journalist Kazi Jesin; and Senior Reporter of The Daily Star Zyma Islam.​

 

[Saif]

Move to form media commission ignoring reform recommendations

Even ten months after the Media Reform Commission submitted its report, none of its recommendations has been implemented. Now, at the very end of the interim government’s tenure, an initiative has been taken to form a National Media Commission.

en.prothomalo.com

Move to form media commission ignoring reform recommendations
Draft National Media Commission Ordinance published for public feedback, draft Broadcast Commission Ordinance also prepared.

Mustak Ahmed Dhaka
Published: 29 Jan 2026, 17: 35

Representational image

Even ten months after the Media Reform Commission submitted its report, none of its recommendations has been implemented. Now, at the very end of the interim government’s tenure, an initiative has been taken to form a National Media Commission.

Aiming to ensure media freedom and the protection of journalists, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has prepared a draft of the National Media Commission Ordinance, 2026.

The draft was published on the ministry’s website on Wednesday to solicit opinions. Only three days have been allotted for feedback, with the deadline set for 31 January. A day earlier, on Tuesday, a draft Broadcast Commission Ordinance was also published to establish a Broadcast Commission. This indicates that the ministry intends to form two separate commissions.

However, the Media Reform Commission formed by the interim government had recommended the establishment of a single, independent ‘Bangladesh Media Commission’, free from government control.

The proposal suggested integrating the existing Press Council for newspapers and news agencies with the previously proposed Broadcast Commission for broadcast and online media, creating a unified regulatory body. Instead, the Ministry of Information is now planning to form two separate commissions, the ‘National Media Commission’ and the ‘Broadcast Commission’.

Officials at the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting said the draft ordinance would be reviewed after receiving feedback, and a decision would then be taken on finalising it. With the national election scheduled for 12 February, just two weeks away, and a new government set to take office thereafter, questions have been raised about the haste in pushing ahead with two separate commissions while ignoring the reform commission’s recommendations.

The interim government, at the very last moment, is rushing to put together the National Media Ordinance in a patchwork manner-----Kamal Ahmed, senior journalist and chairman of the Media Reform Commission.

The Media Reform Commission submitted its report to the interim government in March last year. Its chair, senior journalist Kamal Ahmed, told Prothom Alo on Wednesday, “The interim government, at the very last moment, is rushing to put together the National Media Ordinance in a patchwork manner. There are doubts about whether the objective behind forming a media commission will actually be achieved.”

Kamal Ahmed added that if the existing Press Council remains unchanged, the proposed media commission’s jurisdiction and responsibilities would be largely the same. Overlapping mandates between two institutions would only deepen complications. In his view, it would be best to implement the Media Reform Commission’s recommendations exactly as proposed.

However, Information and Broadcasting Adviser Syeda Rizwana Hasan does not believe that forming two separate commissions would create additional problems. Speaking to Prothom Alo, she said that incorporating the Press Council into the National Media Commission would have been a major achievement, but that was not possible at this stage.

The adviser noted that the Media Reform Commission had recommended both a media commission and a law to protect journalists. The media commission, she said, would now also work on ensuring journalists’ protection, while the Broadcasting Commission would handle broadcast-related matters such as licence recommendations.

Syeda Rizwana Hasan added, “We will try to get both ordinances approved within the remaining tenure of the interim government. However, it may not be possible to actually form the commissions within this time.”

Syeda Rizwana Hasan File Photo

We will try to get both ordinances approved within the remaining tenure of the interim government. However, it may not be possible to actually form the commissions within this time-----Syeda Rizwana Hasa, information and broadcasting adviser.

How the commission will be formed under the draft

Once the ordinance comes into force, a commission titled the National Media Commission will be established, with a headquarters. If necessary, branch offices may be set up anywhere in the country with government approval.

The commission will be consisted of nine members, one chairperson and eight members. At least one member must be a woman and one must represent the small ethnic community or the indigenous community. Appointments will be made through a five-member selection committee, headed by an Appellate Division judge nominated by the Chief Justice.

For each position, the committee will recommend two candidates to the president. The nominees must have at least 20 years of practical knowledge and experience in media, journalism, law, technology, information or culture. More than one nominee from the same media outlet or from media organisations under the same ownership will not be allowed.

Under this process, the president will appoint the chairperson and eight members for a four-year term. Their rank, salaries and other benefits will be determined by the government. A quorum will require the presence of the chairperson and at least six members.

The commission must hold at least one meeting every two months. To ensure coordination, the chairpersons of the Press Council and the Press Institute of Bangladesh, or their nominated representatives, may be invited to commission meetings. Experts may also be included when necessary.

Kamal Ahmed File photo

There are doubts about whether the objective behind forming a media commission will actually be achieved-----Kamal Ahmed, senior journalist and chairman of the Media Reform Commission
Powers and functions of the commission.

According to the draft ordinance, one of the commission’s core responsibilities will be to ensure the protection and freedom of media and journalism, uphold Article 39 of the Constitution, and formulate and enforce standards for self-regulation.

Article 39 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of thought and conscience, freedom of speech and expression, and freedom of the press.

In line with international norms, the commission will formulate codes of good practice, ethics and conduct to ensure transparency, professionalism, objectivity, impartiality and accountability among approved electronic, online and print media as well as journalists. It will also frame regulations on minimum qualifications and protection for journalists.

The draft states that regulations on journalism and journalists’ protection will include the right to access information, the right to investigate and publish reports in the public interest, the right to protect sources, the right to a safe working environment free from physical or mental pressure, fair recruitment conditions, appropriate remuneration and workplace justice.

All media outlets will be required to comply with the commission’s regulations to ensure journalists’ protection. The commission will make necessary recommendations to the government and law enforcement agencies to prevent threats, harassment and violence against media organisations and journalists, the draft mentions.

Recommending journalists’ pay and remuneration to the government will also fall within the commission’s remit. In dispute resolution, the commission will have the authority to order corrective measures, including compensation, to be taken by media outlets.​

 

[Saif]

TIB slams draft media ordinances as ‘mockery’ of free press

Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) on Saturday described the draft National Media Commission and Broadcasting Commission Ordinances as a ‘parting mockery’ of public expectations for free media development. The TIB said the demand for a unified, independent and effective media

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

TIB slams draft media ordinances as ‘mockery’ of free press

Published :
Jan 31, 2026 19:23
Updated :
Jan 31, 2026 19:25

Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) on Saturday described the draft National Media Commission and Broadcasting Commission Ordinances as a ‘parting mockery’ of public expectations for free media development.

The TIB said the demand for a unified, independent and effective media commission to ensure the development of free media and independent broadcasting in Bangladesh has existed for a long time, a demand that was also reflected in the report of the Media Reform Commission, UNB reports.

It, however, said the interim government remained entirely indifferent to implementing its recommendations despite more than ten months having passed since the submission of that report.

Instead, at the very final stage of its tenure, the interim government has published two draft ordinances - titled the ‘National Media Commission Ordinance and the Broadcasting Commission Ordinance’ - aimed at establishing two new government bodies.

The TIB expressed deep disappointment and frustration over this move, noting that TIB believes that the preparation of these two drafts - contrary to public expectations and the recommendations of the Media Reform Commission, with the apparent objective of imposing greater control over the media sector - and seeking public opinions within only three days, constitutes a parting mockery by the interim government.

At the same time, TIB identifies this move as yet another example of the interim government’s continuous practice of secrecy across nearly all areas from the outset, as well as the reform-opposing, obstructive actions carried out by certain sections of the government under the guise of state reform.

In a statement, TIB Executive Director Dr Iftekharuzzaman said, “In both cases, the proposed structure and status of the commissions, the rank and authority of the commissioners, and the administrative and financial arrangements are designed to establish two institutions that are entirely under government control, particularly under bureaucratic authority. This represents a mockery of the interim government’s commitment to the development of free media and independent broadcasting.”

While this is disappointing, he said, they are not at all surprised, as during the tenure of the interim government its failure to curb state and non-state control over the media, acts of violence, and attempts to impose authority, and in many cases its direct and indirect role as an instigator, have been evident.

At the final stage of its tenure, Zaman said, these two proposed drafts reflect the same adversarial stance by the government toward expectations of media freedom.

Referring to the numerous limitations of the existing Press Council and the absence of any comparable institutional framework for the broadcast media, Dr Zaman noted that the Media Reform Commission, based on research and consultations with relevant stakeholders, recommended the establishment of a unified, independent Media Commission free from government control.

However, he said, the government has shown not the slightest consideration for this recommendation.

Instead of pursuing the short-sighted initiative of establishing two new regulatory government bodies for the interrelated media and broadcasting sectors, Dr Zaman proposed the formation of a single, unified, and independent media commission operating outside government authority.

TIB called on the government not to hastily promulgate the two draft ordinances.

At the same time, the Executive Director of TIB has urged and expressed expectations toward the political parties participating in the upcoming election, many of whom have themselves been victims of control over free media and independent broadcasting in Bangladesh and have made strong commitments in their respective election manifestos and campaigns, that, following the formation of the new parliament, they will immediately proceed through a participatory process.

Respecting their own experiences, commitments and public expectations, they should establish a genuinely independent and impartial unified media commission, TIB said.

Such a commission would be capable of ensuring the highest professional standards and creating an enabling environment for the development of free media and independent broadcasting in the country, he said.​

 

[Saif]

Media reform in Bangladesh needs precision, not pressure

Bangladesh is entering a decisive phase in its approach to governing its media. The proposed Broadcasting Ordinance, 2026 and the National Media Commission Ordinance, 2026 make this evident.

www.thedailystar.net

Media reform in Bangladesh needs precision, not pressure

30 January 2026, 00:49 AM

By S.M. Rezwan-Ul-Alam

FILE VISUAL: ANWAR SOHEL

Dr S.M. Rezwan-Ul-Alam is associate professor and chair of Media, Communication, and Journalism Department at North South University.

Bangladesh is entering a decisive phase in its approach to governing its media. The proposed Broadcasting Ordinance, 2026 and the National Media Commission Ordinance, 2026 make this evident. Together, these proposed Ordinances signal the aspiration to update an old regulatory system to suit a media environment that has changed faster than the laws have been able to keep pace.

The ambition deserves recognition. Media regulation is no longer a simple matter of managing television channels and radio frequencies. Digital platforms, online journalism, and hybrid forms of broadcasting have reshaped how information circulates. Governments across the world are struggling to keep pace. Bangladesh is not late to this conversation. In fact, in some ways, it is arriving at the right moment—when lessons from elsewhere are already becoming apparent.

The real question, then, is not whether reform is necessary. It is whether reform is being calibrated carefully enough to make it sustainable. There is much in the draft laws that point in the right direction. Moving away from scattered, informal oversight towards commission-based regulation is a structural improvement. It replaces uncertainty with institutional order. The focus on professional standards, ethical conduct, and dispute resolution also reflects an understanding that media quality, and not just media control, matters. Even the decision to bring digital and online media into the conversation shows an awareness that regulation cannot stay trapped in the analogue age.

These are not small steps. They form a solid base. But a solid base still needs careful design above ground. One area where the drafts feel unfinished is their treatment of freedom of expression. The laws acknowledge constitutional guarantees of free speech and press freedom, but mostly in passing. What they do not do in their current form is make those freedoms an active guide for regulatory action.

In practice, effective media regulation works on a simple logic. Regulators intervene only when the law clearly allows it, there is a genuine public interest factor, and only to the extent necessary. This idea—often described as legality, necessity, and proportionality—is not an abstract theory. It is how regulators in countries like the UK justify decisions that restrict content while still protecting free expression.

When these principles are written directly into the operational parts of a law, they protect everyone. They protect journalists from arbitrary interference, regulators from accusations of overreach, and governments from legal and political fallout. Including such guidance would not weaken Bangladesh’s regulatory hand. It would steady it.

Another issue lies in institutional design. Under the proposed framework, both the Broadcast Commission and the National Media Commission are given broad responsibilities. Licensing, content oversight, ethics, dispute resolution, and directive powers all sit within a relatively small institutional space.

Coordination is essential, but overlap can be risky. When mandates blur, confusion follows—about who decides what, who is accountable, and where authority begins and ends. European regulatory systems tend to avoid this by drawing more precise functional lines. Broadcasting regulation is often kept narrowly focused, while broader ethical or professional issues are handled through separate or co-regulatory mechanisms. This is not about ideology. It is about administrative clarity. Clear boundaries reduce conflict, make enforcement smoother, and help media organisations understand the rules they are expected to follow.

Independence is another area where refinement could make a big difference. The draft laws establish formal appointment processes, but the system remains executive-driven mainly. That is not unusual, and independence does not mean absence of oversight. But experience from places like the US shows that even limited safeguards—fixed terms, transparent appointment criteria, and clear grounds for removal—can dramatically improve institutional stability.

Regulators who are seen as rule-based rather than personality-based tend to attract more compliance and less confrontation. For a government trying to implement reform smoothly, such credibility can be a strategic advantage. Then there is the issue of legal clarity. Several key ideas in the draft laws—professional ethics, responsible conduct, public interest, journalistic standards—are defined broadly. Flexibility is functional, but vagueness carries risks. It opens space for uneven interpretation and discretionary enforcement, which benefits no one. Many European systems handle this by pairing general legal principles with detailed codes developed through consultation. That approach allows standards to evolve without leaving everyone guessing. Bangladesh could move in a similar direction with relatively minor technical adjustments.

Due process is another quiet but essential concern. The proposed commissions have the power to issue directives and resolve disputes, yet the laws do not consistently spell out basic procedural safeguards. Notice, the right to be heard, reasoned decisions, and access to judicial review are not luxuries. They are what make regulation legitimate in practice. Courts in South Asia, including India, have repeatedly shown that they expect such safeguards even when the state has broad regulatory authority. Writing them clearly into the law reduces uncertainty and protects enforcement actions from being overturned later.

Digital and online media present perhaps the most sensitive challenge. Licensing and close oversight make sense for spectrum-based broadcasting because frequencies are limited. However, the internet operates differently. That is why many countries are now moving towards differentiated approaches—lighter-touch regulation for online media, focused more on transparency and accountability than prior permission. Applying broadcast-style control to digital media risks stifling innovation and creating legal confusion. A more apparent distinction in the draft laws would help avoid those unintended consequences.

Finally, transparency matters more than it often appears on paper. The drafts offer limited scope for structured consultation or public reasoning behind decisions. Yet experience from the UK and Europe shows that open consultation does not slow regulation; it strengthens it. When rules are explained and stakeholders are heard, compliance improves, and conflict decreases. None of these points argues against reform. They say to get it right.

Bangladesh has an opportunity to show that strong regulation and media freedom are not opposites but partners. With a few careful, low-cost refinements—embedding guiding principles, clarifying mandates, strengthening procedural safeguards, and improving transparency—the country can build a media governance framework that is firm, fair, and ready for the future. That kind of balance is more complex than passing a law. But it is also what lasts.​