Features

What Has Changed in Post-Hasina Bangladesh?

Recent Features

Features | Society | South Asia

What Has Changed in Post-Hasina Bangladesh?

A survivor of enforced disappearance under Sheikh Hasina returns home after over six years to see if the country’s political and social landscape has truly changed.

What Has Changed in Post-Hasina Bangladesh?

Chalk writing on the street proclaims “36 July” – i.e. August 5 – as “Victory Day Bangladesh.”

Credit: Saqlain Rizve

Last month, I returned to Bangladesh for three weeks. It was my first time back in my home country after over six years in exile. November 7, the date of my arrival there, holds a special meaning to me, as it was on this day in 2017 that agents of Sheikh Hasina’s regime abducted me and subjected me to torture in a case of enforced disappearance

For 44 agonizing days that November and December, I became one of the 3,500 individuals who were forcibly disappeared under Hasina’s reign. My hands were cuffed, my eyes were blindfolded, and time to time my captors would put a black hood over my blindfold to completely terrorize me. I still remember the voice of one of the captors, who said, “You are our slave now.”  The objective of that whole illegal operation was to completely break my free agency and human dignity. They succeeded – for a while.

However, unlike the many other Bangladeshis who never returned, I was fortunate to have been released – thanks in part to mounting national and international pressure – on the condition that I remain silent about who abducted me, tell the media a false story that I was abducted by some miscreants, and refrain from any “anti-state” research and writing. Soon after my release, I left home, traveling first to the United States, then Norway, and finally Australia, which I am now proud to call my new home.

For the past seven years, I have carried the trauma of those torturous experiences. The desperate cries of other illegally detained individuals still echo in my mind, and the pain of being forcibly separated from my family only deepened my sense of isolation. Yet during my exile, I continued to write and speak out against Hasina’s brutal regime.

However, every article I wrote, every conference I spoke at, and every media interview I gave, I had to go through a constant internal negotiation – as if, despite my body is being free, I was living in a mental prison. Despite my continued dilemma, I persisted and resisted Hasina’s authoritarian regime, as did many others. This resilience against authoritarian oppression transformed me from a victim into a survivor.

I was far from alone in suffering at the hands of the Hasina regime. After forming a government through free and participatory elections in 2008, Hasina did not permit any free elections over the next 16 years. Her regime was marked by gross acts of human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances that prompted the United States to levy human rights sanctions against the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), a specialized security force. 

Hundreds and thousands were imprisoned by her government, and various intelligence agencies were encouraged to build chains of illegal secret prisons across the country. Hasina reigned by promoting a culture of fear and intimidation. Political opponents, academics, journalists, cartoonists, and critics – none of them was spared. On the other hand, with a persistent narrative of growth and stability, Hasina’s rule helped to  generate wealth for a few oligarchs who have questionable ties with her family.

The dark days of Hasina’s rule came to an abrupt end on August 5, 2024. On that day, Hasina fled to neighboring India against the backdrop of a student-led mass uprising. Today, Bangladesh is ruled by an interim government helmed by Nobel laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus.

My return to Bangladesh served as a powerful reminder of the countless lives sacrificed in pursuit of freedom. With Hasina no longer in power, I wanted to see if, and to what extent, the country’s political and social landscapes had truly changed.

Freedom of Speech and Democratic Resilience Prevail, But Surveillance Persists

Dhaka, the capital, is now alive with public events: forums, seminars, and discussions are devoted to analyzing the crimes of the past regime and shaping the future of Bangladesh. I participated in several such gatherings as a speaker, including one organized by my alma mater, the Department of Mass Communication and Journalism at the University of Dhaka. 

There, I shared a platform with two prominent Bangladeshi journalists, Shahidul Alam and Tasneem Khalil. Alam, once imprisoned by Hasina’s regime, was later profiled as a Time Magazine Person of the Year. Khalil, editor-in-chief of the Sweden-based investigative news outlet Netra News, endured torture by Bangladesh’s military intelligence agency DGFI in 2007 and has lived in exile ever since. 

Khalil’s recent return, like mine, symbolizes both a personal milestone and a broader shift in the country’s political climate.

The event’s audience was primarily made up of journalism students, yet two men who did not appear to be students quietly entered, took photos, and made notes. When I asked the organizers about these unfamiliar faces, I learned they were intelligence agents. Their presence slightly unsettled me. I wondered why a public event titled “Free Thinking in Exile,” held at a public university, required state surveillance. What national security interest could possibly be at stake in such open discourse?

This was not an isolated experience. 

At another public event at the national museum, survivors of enforced disappearances spoke openly. Organized by the Diaspora Alliance for Democracy and the Bangladesh Research Analysis & Information Network (BRAIN), the event featured co-panelists including the press secretary of Yunus, head of the interim government, and a prominent analyst. The front rows were filled with children holding photos of their disappeared fathers, now part of “Mayer Daak” (Mothers’ Call), a forum for the families of the missing.

Before we took the stage, one co-panelist confided that several intelligence agents had called him, inviting him to “have tea with their bosses.” Even at the event itself, someone claiming to represent an intelligence agency approached him, saying, “Our sir wants to have coffee with you. We really like your analysis.” 

These anecdotal experiences highlight the pervasive and insidious state surveillance that continues to infiltrate even public forums dedicated to free thought and open dialogue.

Under Hasina, the state’s surveillance apparatus had become deeply institutionalized. Although the interim government led by Yunus undertook some reforms, the sprawling intelligence networks – crucial enablers of past human rights abuses – remained largely untouched. 

Nevertheless, there is a growing, vocal resistance that is pushing for the gradual liberalization of the former brutal authoritarian political climate in the country.

Activists are openly discussing the DGFI’s notorious role in bolstering Hasina’s authoritarian rule. At the main gate of  Dhaka University’s Arts Faculty, and on the wall of the the historic Madhur Canteen, one now sees written messages calling for the banning of the RAB and the abolition of the DGFI – an act that would have been unthinkable just months ago. These scenes capture both the persistence of arbitrary overreach of the state and the simmering resistance against it.

Journalism Is Freer Now, But Challenges Remain

Under the previous government, critical news outlets like Netra News and the U.S.-based BenarNews were blocked. Access required proxy servers. Today, both platforms are not only unblocked but can hold public events in Dhaka, signaling a freer environment for journalism. 

Netra News even established a bureau in Dhaka, and at its launch, several high-ranking government officials, including an adviser and the press secretary to Yunus, were present. BenarNews hosted a public event called “What Do You Want in New Bangladesh?” that was attended by hundreds. On television talk shows and in news reports, journalists, and analysts now freely debate previously taboo subjects.

Still, challenges persist despite this relatively freer atmosphere for journalism. 

Much reporting simply delivers backlash against perceived supporters of the previous regime, rather than offering in-depth, investigative coverage. Legitimate topics like nepotism in the selection of political advisers or the appointment of members to reform commissions remain largely unexamined. 

Meanwhile, a reporter friend from The Daily Star, the largest English-language daily, told me that some of her colleagues now receive informal “green lights” from intelligence agencies before traveling abroad, assuring them smoother passage. As I was writing this article, a protest broke out in Savar, close to Dhaka, where a political activist was picked up and taken away blindfolded by the security forces only to be released several hours later. Another activist called Sejuti Hossain said that unidentified people in civilian clothes kept knocking and telling him to open his door. These are reminders that the authoritarian practices of the Hasina regime still persist in the state agencies. 

The editor of the Daily New Age, Nurul Kabir, publicly said that intelligence agents stopped and questioned him at the airport about attending an international media conference. On Facebook, he expressed surprise that such intimidation – common under the old regime – continued. However, the new government’s quick response to address his concerns offers a glimmer of hope for gradual change. After all no one has been forcefully disappeared or extrajudicially killed under the new government so far.

Uncertain Times, But Not Without Hope

Many people I spoke with feel uncertain about the current government’s stability. This uncertainty has two main sources. First, during the July-August uprising, Hasina ordered police to fire on student protesters, resulting in over 1,000 deaths and leaving hundreds more blinded. 

When she fled, protesters retaliated by torching police stations. According to official figures, 44 officers were killed in these attacks. This brief but brutal period left trust between police and the public in tatters. Although the police are returning to fuller operations – with the Army now holding magistracy power to restore law and order – public trust remains fragile.

The second source of uncertainty is economic. Under previous governments, businesses often navigated a known, if unofficial, patronage network. Now, the rules of the game have changed. Without clear lines of authority, business owners face confusion about whom to approach for security and protection. 

A friend who runs a restaurant in Dhaka lamented that after Hasina’s fall, multiple groups have claimed their “territory,” driving up his costs. A journalist explained that under Hasina, businesses knew where to find green lights and where to expect red lines. Now, all is blurred.

Despite these difficulties, the people of Bangladesh are undeniably happier. They can speak freely, and the fear of immediate reprisal has loosened its grip. 

When I left Bangladesh at the end of my visit, my emotions were mixed. 

I felt joy at returning home without fear, yet lingering unease at the deep-rooted forces still at play. At least one activist was taken away blindfolded by the security forces in unsettling reminder of dark state practices commonplace during Hasina’s time. Surveillance in the civilian spaces remains persistent, although there is pushback. 

I also felt immense hope. The activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens I met are seizing the moment to reclaim their voices and public spaces, laying the groundwork for a more open, democratic future. The next challenge for Bangladesh’s current government would be to see the country through a democratic transition by holding a free and fair elections. After all one needs to remember that the country plunged into a dark authoritarian state because of the lack of free and fair elections, a basic democratic practice.