The political culture of a country immensely depends on the role of political parties (Rajandran and Lee 2023). After a party takes power, it often turns hostile towards opposition leaders, resulting in punitive actions and restricting their political activities (Yilmaz and Erturk 2023). Like other Afro-Asian nations, Bangladesh carries a legacy of government-led punitive measures (Bodea and Elbadawi 2008). During Hussain Mohammad Ershad’s tenure, his government employed suppression tactics to nullify the opposition parties’ presence (Hussain and Suma 2022). The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) led government replicated the same approach after winning the 1991 and 2002 parliamentary elections. Since 2008, the Awami League government has also been suppressing the opposition parties (Hassan 2023). Doubtless, punitive actions are sometimes needed against particular political parties for the country’s greater interest. For instance, the Jamaat-e-Islam party of Bangladesh was convicted of terror involvement and societal radicalisation, prompting its ban by the Awami League government; this resulted in the arrests of many leaders who faced legal consequences, including wartime charges. However, the politics of Bangladesh is allegedly violent against the opposition partiesto remain in power (Wolf 2022).
The legacy of punishment by the government against the opposition parties started in Bangladesh after the assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (Bari 2022). The pro-Pakistani lobby in Bangladesh wanted to diminish the democratic values of Bangladesh and establish an intolerant political culture after Mujibur Rahman, which was accelerated by the two military regimes of Ziaur Rahman and Hussain Mohammad Ershad (Nandy 2019). Even after the ending of the era of Ershad’s military regime, the political violence and culture of conspiracy remain in Bangladesh. Since the early 1980s, the country’s politics has been dominated by a dynastic rivalry between two major political leaders, Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia (Khan and Ara 2023). Suykens and Islam (2015) found that political violence increased sharply in Dhaka between 2002 and 2013, resulting in significant casualties. Like Khaleda Zia’s administration, the Hasina government also faces criticism for obstructing opposition during elections, raising concerns about Bangladesh’s democratic integrity, often justified by national security (Hashmi 2022).
Many commentators identified the reason for Bangladesh’s political crisis as personal rather than political, which seems to be a simplistic view (Das and Anisujjaman 2023). In reality, the crisis is deeply ideological and thus related to the independence of the country of Pakistan (Talukdar, Akter and Mia 2022). Political violence and a culture of punishment are embedded in the politics of Bangladesh, a culture of punishment within Bangladesh’s politics—a worrisome situation for public security.
Research Objectives, Research Questions, and Methodology
This article has three key objectives—(1) to identify the reasons behind the culture of punishment and conspiracy in Bangladeshi politics; (2) to delineate the culture of punishment under different political parties of Bangladesh; and (3) to investigate the role of civil society of Bangladesh in response to the culture of punishment by the ruling party in Bangladesh. The initial part of this article presents the context of violence and retribution within Bangladeshi politics. Outlining the fundamental drivers of political violence in Bangladesh, the article explores punitive inclinations under different ruling parties. Furthermore, it examines civil society’s role in countering this retributory culture.
The article’s inclusion criteria involved (a) concentrating on the research objectives, (b) being published after the liberation war of Bangladesh, and (c) pertaining to the availability of full articles. The exclusion criteria involved sources that involved (a) regions/countries other than Bangladesh and (b) were about non-political violence.
The data is categorised and analysed employing a thematic content analysis method. Identifying patterns and connections within the literature facilitates the discernment of underlying themes. The collected themes from each text are synthesised, integrated, and condensed in the next section.
Culture of Violence and Punishment: A Background
The culture of violence is deeply ingrained in Bangladesh’s party system, but pinpointing its origin is difficult (Khan and Ara 2023). The generally accepted notion is that the culture of violence springs from three fundamental roots (Moniruzzaman 2009). First, after the War of Independence, many weapons remained in the hands of unscrupulous political cadres, subsequently fueling political conflicts. Second, the issuance of light machine guns to every parliamentary member during Sheikh Mujibur Rehman’s government introduced firearms to the Bangladeshi political landscape. Finally, the institutionalised gun culture during Ershad’s regime allowed students to seize political power against the opposition.
According to Moniruzzaman (2009), since the late 1980s, the repeated violent clashes on the student fronts have directly affected major political parties. Today, all the major political parties have vigorous cadres who concentrate on strengthening their political base and opposition parties’ cadres (Talukder 2022). Therefore, politics relies more on muscle power. The new politicians are increasingly replacing old-fashioned politicians with money and armed support, making the current Bangladesh politics appear apolitical, money-driven, and violent (Maîtrot and Jackman 2023).
One of Bangladesh’s most heinous and internationally recognised instances of violence stems from the war crimes committed during the liberation war. These crimes require a judicial process to establish the perpetrators’ guilt, ensure justice for the victims, and free the country from this evil curse (Qasmi 2023). The independent Bangladesh policy of the Awami League and the anti-independence policy of the pro-Pakistan Jamaat-e-Islami divided the Bangladeshi population into two groups (Hashmi 2022). Murder, rape, genocide, enslavement for slave labor, torture and execution of prisoners, and destruction of cities and villages are all war crimes that were committed in the nine-month war of independence, leading to the deaths of three million people at the hands of the Pakistani military and their allies (Qasmi 2023). Emerging in recent years Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB), a militant Muslim group, has organised several politically violent incidents in Bangladesh. Some of the alleged incidents of violence were the Bengali New Year bombings in Ramna in 2001, a cultural program in Udichi in 1999, and a nationwide attack in 2005. These acts of violence stem from JMB’s stand against Bengali culture (Moniruzzaman 2009).
In 2001, after winning the election, the BNP and their ally, Jamaat-e-Islami, suppressed Hindus and political opponents, causing forced displacement of thousands of Hindus (Sarwar 2023). The Bangladeshi Judicial Service Commission thoroughly probed the allegations of targeted attacks against the Hindu minority and political activists, revealing links to 25 former ministers and members of Parliament from the BNP–Jamaat-led alliance (Ethirajan 2011).
Within rallies and protests, supporters of various political parties often engaged in violence with one another and the police (Moniruzzaman 2009). Notably, the supporters of the Awami League brutally interrupted opposition party gatherings, often with the involvement of police, leading to many fatalities. To prevent their rivals’ gatherings and rallies, opposition groups often employ armed aggression and intimidation (Jackman and Maitrot 2022). Illustrating this alarming trend, statistics from 2013 reveal that there were 22,407 injuries and 507 fatalities. The following year, in 2014, there were 8,373 injuries and 47 fatalities (Hoque 2014). The torture included beatings, threats, and electric shocks. Such police atrocities may carry on because of the culture of impunity, and the government seldom arrests or punishes the torturers. As per the report on human rights, security personnel occasionally used excessively deadly force, and police frequently carried out extrajudicial murders. In January 2014, about 101 people died. In the first nine months of the year, 101 people died in police and jail custody (Hoque 2014).
Reasons behind the Culture of Punishment by Ruling Party
Bangladesh’s political culture is based on a complex interplay of punishment, violence, and conspiracy (Wolf 2022). The ruling party’s culture of punishment can be attributed toseveral causes, which are as follows:
-
Political violence results from Bangladesh’s weak democratic culture (Amundsen 2016).
-
Another factor contributing to the violent political culture is hereditary political succession (Khan and Ara 2023). The supporters and party cadres lack basic political education and organisational expertise. Therefore, the political culture is violent because of the aggressive attitude towards opposition parties.
-
For many Bangladeshis, politics has become their main means of earning money and exercising power. Many supporters are floating since they prefer to be closely associated with the ruling party. They ensure the ruling party stays in power (Maîtrot and Jackman 2023).
-
Another factor contributing to the rise of the culture of punishment is the reliance on street power (Maîtrot and Jackman 2023).
-
The liberal democratic model assumes that the ruling elite participates in the system of autocracy and that the ruling elite periodically rotates through the electoral mechanism (Suykens and Islam 2013). The fear of losing elections forces the ruling party to use its power to suppress opposition parties (Uddin 2023).
-
Political violence results from a lack of political trust and mutual understanding (Mollah and Jahan 2018).
-
Political violence is the result of bureaucratic politicisation. The relationship between the bureaucracy and the ruling party accelerates its culture of punishment (Sarker et al 2017).
-
Another reason is the interference of the courts, which demonstrates significant flaws in the judicial and police systems of Bangladesh. Following the Special Powers Act, the government or a district magistrate may order a 30-day detention to prevent an act that could jeopardise the country’s security (Sirazi and Rahman 2018).
The Legacy of Punishment and Conspiracy Under Different Ruling Parties
The culture of punishment is an integral part of Bangladeshi politics. This section will delineate the activities and policies of the various ruling parties toward opposition parties.
Awami League
The father of the nation, Mujibur Rahman, became the country’s first President. Initially, his approach was generous towards the citizens with the policy of accommodation and tolerance. However, under his governance, the maintenance of law and order deteriorated significantly when the anti-Mujib forces sought to bring trouble upon Mujibur Rahman, creating the impression of insecurity in the state. The situation escalated after law authorities fatally shot two National Awami Party student activists during a procession on January 1, 1973, marking the state’s first involvement in violence (Moten 1980). Extensive political political violence was observed from 1972 to 1975. Mujibur Rahman consolidated power by changing the constitution to outlaw all political parties and activities (Hashmi 2022).
The escalating discontent and instability took a swift toll on the government andresulted in political turmoil. On January 25, 1975, Mujib proclaimed a state emergency, and his followers voted to modify the constitution to outlaw all opposition political groups. The Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League, was the sole political party officially recognised and founded by his political followers. This period witnessed the implementation of significant state socialism measures, with the party aligning itself with rural laborers, farmers, and the working class (Quamruzzaman 2010). Mujib oversaw the detention of opposition activists and tight supervision of political activity nationwide using government troops and a militia of supporters known as the Jatiyo Rakkhi Bahini. The police and the paramilitaries were accused of murdering political opponents, torturing detainees, rapes, and forced disappearance (Hashmi 2022).
With the First Amendment to the Constitution of Bangladesh, President Mujibur Rahman was granted direct executive authority, personally or through designated officials, curtailing people’s effective participation through their elected representatives. Therefore, parliament was brought under the control of the President, who would be chosen in a direct election every five years (New York Times 1975). Following this amendment, many people started movements for democratic ideas (Kabir 2020). Amidst the political turmoil, Mujibur Rahman and his family were murdered in a military coup d’état (Hashmi 2022).
In 1996, Sheikh Hasina became the prime minister of Bangladesh. As the leader of the Awami League, Sheikh Hasina was committed to establishing democracy and ensuring human rights. While in the opposition party, she moved against the ruling government to protect the supporters and leaders of the opposition. During the regime of Hussain Mohammad Ershad, she actively opposed the government’s practices of corruption and persecution (Ruhullah and Qodir 2020).
Sheikh Hasina won three consecutive elections. Nonetheless, in the 2013 and 2018 parliament elections, there was no proper participation of opposition parties in the elections. In 2018, BNP and other oppositions boycotted the election due to suppressive activities of the government. Since 2009, many BNP leaders have been arrested for corruption and criminal activities (Bari 2022). The political movements of the opposition parties have been restricted in Bangladesh. Punitive actions were taken against many BNP leaders (Mamun, Islam and Islam 2021). The criticism was raised the government for misusing police forces and administration to suppress the opposition parties (Hossain and Haque 2022).
Similarly, many Jamaat leaders have been given capital punishment with the judiciary’s activism. Nevertheless, the opposition parties explained the judicial activism against the war criminals as the vindictive political activism of the ruling party. In August 2013, the Jamaat-e-Islami party was banned by the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (Hossain and Haque 2022).
While the Bangladeshi Constitution guarantees equality before the law and the right to life, there is an alarming frequency of death penalty imposition. The Human Rights Committee’s framework emphasises the precise application of the “most serious crimes” and avoiding the death sentence as an unusual punishment (UN Human Rights Committee?1982). The ruling party has been accused of using the war crimes tribunal to intimidate its rivals, the BNP, and Islamist supporters (Agence France-Presse 2015).
Recent events in Bangladesh have demonstrated the opposition’s growing resilience despite 16 years after its unfavorable exit from power (Ahmed 2022). On 10 December 2022, thousands of supporters of Bangladesh’s main opposition party, the BNP, gathered in Dhaka for a “grand rally” to call for Sheikh Hasina’s resignation and fair election. The ruling Awami League also organised several pro-government processions. However, top BNP leaders were detained by police. This partial government attitude and the use of police forces and administration against the opposition have been highly criticized (TBS Report 2022).
Ahead of the 2024 parliamentary election, the Sheikh Hasina-led government is employing suppressive measures against the BNP to curtail their electoral campaigns (Ganguly 2022). Criticised by BNP leaders, these restrictions on peaceful political activities are accused of inducing opposition panic. The United States and UNO have urged Bangladesh authorities to safeguard protesters’ right to peaceful assembly (Rashid and Mahmud 2023).
Accusations of extrajudicial executions, forced disappearances, arbitrary arrests, and torture have been directed at Sheikh Hasina’s government (Hoque 2014). The opposition parties in Bangladesh have encountered difficulties in recent years. After boycotting the 2014 elections, the BNP could not be strengthened. In 2018, the Chairperson of this party, Zia, was imprisoned (Shanta 2020). The BNP leaders continue their campaign against the government’s repressive actions.
Bangladesh Nationalist Party
Ziaur Rahman founded the BNP. The BNP-led government through a democratic election process was intended to bring the nation’s political stability and tranquillity (Rahman 2023). Despite initial optimism, the subsequent period saw persistent violence against opposition parties and religious minorities. Driven by political differences, Zia’s government revitalised religion-based politics, erasing secularism—a foundational principle of the liberation war—from the 1972 constitution. He employed Islamisation as a means to garner support among Muslims, intensifying tensions and resulting in ruthless violence against Hindus (Franda 1981).
The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (Research Directorate 1998) reported a comprehensive picture of the violent political landscape in Bangladesh. During the later part of the BNP government’s tenure, suppressive actions were taken against the opposition parties. Violence and lawlessness were prevalent during a three-week nationwide campaign in March 1996. As the anti-governmental campaign’s escalated, punitive policies were taken against opposition leaders and supporters. The opposition parties organised a sit-in outside the capital’s government office in March 1996 following a sizable civic gathering (Research Directorate 1998). However, the BNP-led ruling government ordered the security forces to stop the anti-government activities. By shooting bullets and tear gas, the security forces attacked the protesters. The international community and a section of the civil society of Bangladesh highly criticised the consecutive protest movement and the barbaric attitude of the ruling party (Rashiduzzaman 1997).
During the BNP-led ruling government’s tenure from 2001 to 2006, the alliance with Jamaat-e-Islami was strongly accused of taking suppressive measures against the opposition party leaders and supporters. Following their electoral victory, the BNP–Jamaat alliance perpetrated notorious attacks on Hindu minorities, prompted by some Hindus’ support for the opposing Awami League. These actions included Islamist militancy, land seizures, sexual assaults on women and children, military aggression, mutinies, extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, public shootings, abductions, torture, and deaths in custody (Sarwar 2023)
Jatiya Party
Bangladesh witnessed a bloodless coup on 24 March 1982, when Hussain Mohammad Ershad became President, displacing President Sattar. He introduced a new martial law period becoming the chief martial law administrator (Al-Amin, Arshi and Biswas 2023).
During his rule from 1982 to 1990, Ershad became known as a cruel dictator. The Ershad-led government used bullets to suppress the student movement in mid-February 1983. His campaign of repression soon expanded into a campaign of cold-blooded murder (Hussain and Suma 2022). And at that moment, state-sponsored corruption gained a strong foothold. Ershad strategically employed religious elements to consolidate his power. Despite his less-than-strict religious practices, he never stayed away when leveraging religion for political gains (Bhuiyan 2021).
Ershad misused his power and took suppressive measures to stop the political activities of the opposition parties. The democratic lacuna damaged the potentiality of people’s participation in politics. Like other dictators, he tried to use the police force and the military against the opposition (Hussain 2023). The protest movement, led by both students and opposition parties, was essentially an urban phenomenon propelled by the active civil society in Dhaka. Starting from Dhaka, the protest movement was crystallised at Chittagong and Sylhet (Blair 1997).
In January 1990, security forces opened fire on Awami League supporters in Chittagong, resulting in multiple fatalities. Subsequently, around 100 individuals were detained. Responding jointly, the Awami League, its allies, and the BNP party coalition declared a three-day strike, boycotting the polls in protest (Egok 2019).
During protests, the authorities employed repressive measures marked by brutality; security personnel employed batons, tear gas, and even live ammunition to disperse the crowds. There were reports of detentions in October and November 1988, with approximately 5,000 arrests made during the 1990 anti-Ershad protest movement. Notably, key opposition figures Sheikh Hasina and Zia were put under house arrest. Eventually, a robust mass movement led to Ershad’s overthrow in December 1990 (Research Directorate 1991).
The Role of Civil Society
The role of civil society in any democratic system is crucial (Machin and Ruser 2023). Bangladesh, too, has witnessed the vibrant role of civil society. Although the ruling government suppressed the voice of civil society during many regimes, civil society played a significant role against an oppressive government (Jackman 2021). A wide spectrum of apolitical people united as a civil society, a non-governmental forum, for the benefit of the greater interests of the society (Rahayu and Darmawan 2021).
Political philosophers like John Locke and Alexis de Tocqueville argued in their writings highlighting civil society’s deep connection with society (Paffenholz 2010). Friedrich Hegel, one of the most prominent civil society representatives, gave a clear account of civil society, presenting it as a “self-organizing” and “self-regulating” unit of society. Hegel, too, supported the demand of the state to regulate society. He never wanted to delegate autonomy to civil society that could act freely in its role (Nandy 2020). The idea of civil society relates to Antonio Gramsci’s cultural theory. As Gramsci theorises, hegemony is a pattern of established power relations among social groupings in a certain historical political scenario that is directly expressed in civil society. In Gramsci’s opinion, hegemony demands direction, often known as headship or consensus leadership, and is not only a question of dominance (Brighenti 2019).
A significant instance of civil society’s influence emerged in Bangladesh with the overthrow of the President Ershad, who had ruled Bangladesh for more than seven years (Hashmi 2022). Several popular civil society movements were held in Bangladesh against the oppressive rule of Ershad, but the protest movement against Ershad escalated in the later part of 1990. Civil society had actively protested with opposition political parties, BNP and Awami League, jointly participated with civil society members to achieve a common goal (Huq 2005). The civil society of Bangladesh also raised its voice during the regime of the BNP-led government (1991–96) (Kochanek 1997).
Nonetheless, the relationship between civil society and political parties often raises concerns about the neutrality and apolitical identity of the civil society of Bangladesh. Many civil society members have been compelled to join a particular political party to save themselves or to get rewards (Tasnim 2017). The regime of the BNP–Jamaat allied government was marked by brutality and oppression when civil society was restricted from criticising the government. Detention was a common phenomenon for many of the civil society protesters. The regime is considered one of the jeopardised regimes for intellectuals and journalists. Many journalists who wrote against the government were killed and detained (Kuttig 2021). Civil society movements have also actively voiced dissent against Hasina’s administration that faced allegations of restricting the political activities of opposition parties. Civil society activists raised concerns about due process in the courts, and the government hit back with severe penalties (Lewis 2015). Some of the pro-BNP and pro-Jamaat members of the civil society demonstrated against the war crimes trial. They criticised it as a political intervention through the judiciary. However, there is no doubt that the civil society of Bangladesh is bifurcated between Awami League and pro-BNP (Lorch 2021).
The present government of Bangladesh under Hasina has been vehemently criticised for not giving space to civil society (Lewis 2015). The police forces have harassed the journalists; many of them have been arrested. This trend is alarming for a democratic environment and ensuring human rights. About eight independent organisations expressed their anxieties on 3 May 2023 on the World Press Freedom Day. The broad limitations on the opportunity of articulations to subvert the circumstances for open political discussions are planned for January 2024. Under the severe Digital Security Act, journalists in Bangladesh face arrest, harassment, surveillance, and physical attacks from government supporters (Human Rights Watch 2023). The fear psychosis among the civil society is not expected to raise their voice against any oppressive ruling government (Hoq 2023).
Conclusions
The global security ranking of Bangladesh presents a grim picture (Hasan and Kamruzzaman 2018). The Awami League’s time in power saw alterations to the constitution, abolishing the caretaker government system. Trials resulted in the imprisonment and execution of opposition figures, drawing international criticism. Despite significant economic growth from 2008 to 2023, past atrocities and power struggles foster a culture where major political entities remain entrenched, often at democracy’s expense. The legacy of past atrocities and power struggles, notably during the 2001–06 BNP–Jamaat-led government and the Ershad period, exacerbated historical challenges. This included notorious political violence and vengeance against the opposition, coupled with severe human rights violations targeting ethnic minorities under the BNP–Jamaat regime. The recurring cycle of political violence, election boycotts, and manipulation stems from a fragile political ecosystem rooted in a turbulent history. While economic progress is evident, historical injustices and eroded trust in political leadership still cast shadows on democratic aspirations. Addressing Bangladesh’s challenges requires a culture of tolerance and respect introduced by major political parties. Fulfilling mutual respect, tolerance, and cooperation is paramount to breaking the cycle. Restoring faith in democratic institutions, safeguarding human rights, neutralising civil society’s environment, disentangling law enforcement from politics, and prioritising inclusivity and transparency are vital. Equitable representation and addressing minority grievances are crucial to building a stable political environment.