In the aftermath of everything that has been happening in Bangladesh since August last year and especially in light of the vandalism which took place in some cities this week on a day that should have been given over to expressing solidarity with Palestine on the Gaza issue, Professor Muhammad Yunus needs to take a hard look at the performance so far of his administration.
The priorities for the Yunus regime are obvious, the most critical of them being the need for the mapping out of a strategy for general elections in the country.
The constitutional basis of the interim regime being in question, despite a defence of it that may be proffered by its acolytes, the crucial factor eight months after the fall of the Awami League government is for the regime to get serious about elections.
It makes little sense to vaguely inform the country that the elections will be held anytime between December this year and June 2026. A concrete pledge is what the nation needs.
The interim government having been installed in power with the specific goal of restoring a democratic political process in Bangladesh, the need is paramount for Yunus and his council of advisors to get serious about returning the country to proper pluralistic governance.
There can hardly be any denying that political parties, particularly the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and others which had for long been involved in agitation against the Awami League government, are beginning to get restive in the absence of a definite road map to the elections.
Of course, analysts of the existing situation realise only too well the pressure the Yunus administration is under.
On the one hand, its raucous student supporters, who have formed a political party, look to a situation develop where they can play a major role in any political permutation and combination.
On the other hand, there could be divergent points of view within the government on the election question.
And, yes, there are the political parties which the interim government can ignore at risk to itself.
Beyond and above all that is the truth that governments not based on constitutional legitimacy at a point reach a dead end, to the chagrin of citizens. The interim regime does not have to be caught in such a cul-de-sac.
In these circumstances, the Yunus administration, which so far has given the impression of feeling its way and stumbling along the way, should be taking serious steps, of the kind that ought to have been taken months ago.
With fanatics and various radical groups on the rampage, intent on destroying the foundational principles of Bangladesh, Professor Yunus should have called a halt to all such brazen acts through decisive action.
It is a pity that such action was not taken.
The destruction of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s home as well as the demolition of symbols of the country’s War of Liberation will forever be a taint on the record of the Yunus regime.
That such vandalism has never been condemned by Yunus or anyone among his advisors has convinced the country that a deliberate campaign has been underway to undermine the ethos of the country.
None of these acts of vandalism does any credit either to the country or to the regime which holds power.
Indeed, history will record that in Bangladesh’s fifty-four-year existence nothing of the kind has ever left society as fractured as it has been following the collapse of the Sheikh Hasina government.
The Yunus regime is in clear need of redeeming itself. The redemption is not to be had in initiating reforms or forming reform commissions, for those are steps which are properly the remit of an elected government and parliament.
Grave mistakes have been made and are yet being made, those which the interim regime should have been careful about.
The change of government in August 2024 should not have translated into an organised assault on national history.
That a country has scores upon scores of politicians in incarceration, that it has the unedifying spectacle of seeing journalists carted off to prison and improbably slapped with charges of murder, that not even lawyers are free to conduct their professional responsibilities — eighty-five of them have been sent to jail — is the embarrassing image held forth of Bangladesh in the global community.
When a former lawmaker released on bail comes under vicious assault by a mob at the jail gate, it is the issue of people’s security which takes centre stage once again.
Add to that the state of fear in which the lawyers’ community operates, for lawyers are afraid to defend those who have been lodged in prison and placed on remand.
The steep and continuing decline of the rule of law is a dark reality that must impel the interim regime into going for a rethink in the interest of its own reputation and in the interest of the nation’s collective future.
It is not a healthy state of society which has its media exercise self-censorship because they are not willing to fall prey to mob violence.
Despite Professor Yunus’ earlier assertion that the media can express themselves freely, a culture of silence, one which stays clear of any criticism of the regime, has descended on the country.
Professor Yunus needs to revisit his statement and reassure the media, if at all he can, that on his watch they will be free to call the interim regime to account for its actions or the lack of them.
Denial of political and social realities are disconcerting for nations.
In August 2024 and later, repression and mob violence was visited upon workers and leaders of the Awami League and policemen across the country.
The consequences have been dire: vigilantes roam the streets, young women are insecure and citizens overall feel intimidated in such conditions.
For Yunus and his government, the decent thing to do will not be an indemnifying of everything wrong that has gone on in these eight months but a willingness to bring all perpetrators of such behaviour to account in the way it is important to bring those responsible for the violence and deaths in the July-August period to account.
Justice is the paramount need; and justice must be done all the way, in all cases.
All of this is certainly a tall order for the government. But there is the future of Bangladesh which must take priority over everything else this government may have in mind.
That future demands that the damage done to history, to heritage be rolled back to a point where the regime, which has within the council of advisers individuals closely associated with the War of Liberation, acknowledges the shortcomings it has exhibited in these months it has been in power.
No government likes to preside over anarchy, but every government clamps down on anarchy and brings to justice every element or group involved in or responsible for pushing a society down the road to disaster.
History is unremitting in its punishment of those who desecrate history or vitiate democratic politics. Examples aplenty are there in the past five decades-plus.
It is a lesson the interim regime ought not to lose sight of. The path before it is clear, without any mist blocking the vision.
It must engage with the political parties — the Awami League, the BNP, the Jatiya Party and all others whose fealty to Bangladesh’s history and belief in liberalism and secularism have been above board.
The regime has to ensure the primacy of the rule of law.
The first step in that direction will be to take harsh action against the mobs which have openly sought to undermine society and the constitutional parameters of the republic.
The second relates to the need to do away with the less than credible charges clamped on political figures, lawyers, journalists and others and take measures to have them freed.
In brief, Bangladesh as it was conceived in 1971 needs to be restored to its people. Politics needs to be restored; national self-esteem needs to be restored.
