CIVICUS speaks about protests, their repression and the changes they’ve brought about in Bangladesh with civil society activist Mohammad Ashrafuzzaman, also known as Zaman Ashraf.
In July, mass student protests erupted in Bangladesh in reaction to the reintroduction of quotas in government jobs for the descendants of those who fought for independence. Protesters faced attacks from the student wing of the ruling Awami League party and brutal repression from security forces, which killed an estimated 440 people and injured thousands, along with arbitrary arrests. The movement persisted regardless, triggering the resignation of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina on 5 August. Hasina fled the country and the army announced the formation of an interim government.
What triggered these protests?
The protests began in July when students from various academic institutions across Bangladesh reacted to the reintroduction of a quota system in public employment. The system reserved 30 per cent of government jobs for the descendants of war veterans. The protesters argued that access to public sector jobs should be based on merit and this system was discriminatory and unfair.
Protests were notable for their broad base of public support. While the protests started in academic institutions, they rapidly expanded to include a wide range of people, including workers from various professions and members of the lower middle class. These protests were widespread and had a more organic and grassroots character than previous ones.
Why did the reintroduction of the quota system cause such discontent?
The quota system was originally introduced to provide employment opportunities to descendants of those who fought in Bangladesh’s 1971 war of independence. The first government after independence, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman – father of Sheikh Hasina Wazed, the prime minister who resigned in response to the protests – adopted a policy of reserving 30 per cent of government jobs for freedom fighters. Between 1972 and 1975, 80 per cent of public recruitment was reserved for this quota and only 20 per cent of posts were left for merit-based recruitment.
Over the years, the system expanded to include not only the children but also the grandchildren of freedom fighters in the 30 per cent quota. Additionally, the government established a 10 per cent female quota, a 10 percent district quota, a five per cent tribal quota and a one per cent physical disability quota. This resulted in at least 56 per cent of government jobs being allocated under the quota system.
Protesters argued that this system primarily benefited those connected to the Awami League, until recently the ruling party, rather than truly deserving descendants of freedom fighters. They claimed the system created a public sector workforce based on loyalty rather than merit.
The list of freedom fighters was also mired in controversy, with allegations that people who didn’t qualify benefited from the quota system. Some listed freedom fighters were found to have been as young as five during the war of independence. Top bureaucrats also falsely claimed to have taken part in the war, further fuelling public anger.
Protesters respected genuine freedom fighters but opposed the exploitation of their legacy for political gain. The protests reflected a wider dissatisfaction with the way the government operated, and highlighted the younger generation’s desire for transparency and fairness in employment practices.
What reforms does civil society advocate for and what challenges does it face?
It’s worth noting that many civil society organisations (CSOs) supported the former government. These CSOs largely remained silent on many important issues such as enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings committed by the government over the past 16 years. A few of them called for public investigations into recent incidents, but their individual and organisational credibility was questionable at best.
Independent civil society, in comparison, is quite vocal and faces significant challenges. Members of independent CSOs have been targeted in politically motivated cases, with some convicted and others facing various forms of repression domestically and internationally.
Independent civil society called for the government to step down, as it had lost the people’s mandate to remain in office and is responsible for crimes against humanity under Article 7 of the Rome Statute, including enforced disappearances. A government that commits such crimes shouldn’t remain in power under any circumstances.
Civil society is advocating for a law enforcement system capable of complying with basic international principles on the use of arms and firearms in dealing with protests. It’s also calling for a comprehensive reform of the criminal justice system, including the judiciary, crime investigation, prosecution and forensic medicine examination systems. These reforms should ensure that all institutions involved operate independently and uphold high standards of professionalism, ultimately guaranteeing fair trials.
Finally, following the prime minister’s resignation, civil society demands the restoration of the people’s right to vote through an overhaul of the electoral system.
How did the government respond to the protests?
In response to 2018 protests, the government initially promised to abolish the quota system, but this was followed by a violent crackdown involving the police and the Awami League’s student wing. Protesters were attacked with weapons and leaders were targeted to disperse the crowds. Despite promises of reform, the violence fuelled further student protests against the Awami League.
Six years later, the government again used violent tactics to suppress protests and imposed severe restrictions on freedoms of association, expression and peaceful assembly. Police and Awami League supporters attacked protesters, often resulting in deaths and serious injuries. One such incident involved Abu Sayed, shot dead by police in front of the cameras in Rangpur on 16 July. Many families were forced to bury their loved ones quickly and without proper documentation to avoid bureaucratic problems.
When initial violent measures failed to disperse protesters, the government escalated its response by deploying police, border guards and military forces equipped with military-grade weapons, armoured personnel carriers and helicopters. Snipers were also reportedly used to target protesters.
The media were also targeted, with journalists covering the events attacked, tortured and killed. Awami League members intervened to prevent journalists reporting on casualties. On 16 July, the government imposed a blackout on mobile phone networks and the internet, which hampered protesters’ ability to organise and the public’s ability to stay informed.
The government also imposed curfews to restrict movement between 7pm and 7am. These were accompanied by shoot-on-sight orders for snipers, creating an environment of fear and further discouraging participation in protests.
Taken together, all of these arbitrary and draconian measures taken by the government to silence dissent showed the extent it was willing to go to try to stifle opposition and maintain its grip on power.
How can the international community best support civil society in Bangladesh?
The international community must publicly and unequivocally condemn the human rights abuses committed by the former government. It should also provide both moral and financial support to enable independent CSOs to operate in Bangladesh without fear of harassment and reprisals. This support would enable these groups to continue their vital work to promote justice and human rights.
Finally, given the inability of the domestic system to deliver justice, independent CSOs are considering taking to international forums such as the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council. These initiatives should receive strong, immediate and sustained support from the international community to ensure accountability and justice for victims through credible probes by UN independent experts. All perpetrators – both civilians and military commanders – should be brought to justice for their crimes.
Civic space in Bangladesh is rated ‘closed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.
Follow @ZamanAshraf on Twitter.
