Strange cases, extraordinary manipulation: Journos caught in triple squeeze

A troubling pattern of questionable legal cases and alleged manipulation has emerged in the aftermath of the July uprising, raising serious concerns over due process, recognition of martyrs, and the growing pressure faced by journalists. Investigations suggest that plaintiffs, law enforcement agencies, and administrative authorities may have created circumstances that have left media professionals trapped under a three-way pressure system.

At the center of the controversy is 24-year-old Ashikur Rahman of Buraburi Satbhita in Ulipur, Kurigram, who was officially recognized as a "July Martyr," with his family receiving Tk30 lakh in government assistance. However, an investigation claims that Ashikur had no direct involvement in the movement and was reportedly hospitalized throughout the period due to a severe brain infection.

Medical documents reviewed during the investigation reportedly indicate that Ashikur was admitted to Rangpur Medical College Hospital between August 12 and August 18, 2024. Doctors there diagnosed him with sepsis, focal seizures, and a history of encephalitis—commonly known as brain infection. Records allegedly contained no mention of head trauma or injuries linked to protest activities.

Yet a later death certificate from Bangladesh Medical University introduced a new element, stating an "alleged history of head injury during student protest." Investigators found that despite MRI examinations and medical board assessments reportedly finding no evidence of head trauma, the claim appeared in official records.

Professor Dr. Montosh Kumar Mondol, who signed the death certificate, reportedly acknowledged that no head injury had been found. According to the investigation, he said the wording was included because students at the time claimed the injury was protest-related, and the term "alleged" was used to indicate it was not medically confirmed.

The issue deepened after a murder case involving Ashikur was filed more than a month after his death. The case named 104 accused individuals, including three journalists. Investigators and local coordinators later claimed Ashikur had not participated in the movement at all.

Local movement organizers and residents questioned the official narrative. Several individuals familiar with Ashikur's condition alleged he had long suffered from a brain tumor and had been receiving treatment well before the July events.

Read More

Yunus’s wealth, deceptionand fraud

Questions have also arisen over claims made in legal documents. Hospital officials reportedly failed to provide evidence that Ashikur had initially been admitted for protest-related injuries. Additionally, medical papers lacked police case documentation commonly found in assault-related cases.

The controversy is not isolated. Another investigation reportedly found that a person who died from electrocution in Lalmonirhat was also recognized as a "July Martyr." A murder case was later filed in connection with that death, despite family members reportedly saying they had neither accused anyone nor filed a case.

The issue has fueled concerns over what critics describe as "blanket cases" involving journalists. Reports indicate that over the past one and a half years, at least 282 journalists have been named in 49 separate cases, many of which are alleged to contain inconsistencies or questionable claims.

In another case tied to the July movement, nine journalists from Bogura were named in a murder case concerning an incident that occurred approximately 210 kilometers away in Dhaka. Several of the accused journalists insist they had no connection to the incident and claim they were targeted due to personal hostility.

Veteran journalists named in such cases described the experience as deeply distressing. Some said they have been forced away from their profession and communities while facing prolonged legal battles.

Former July movement figurehead and ex-general secretary of the July Memory Foundation, Sarjis Alam, acknowledged that isolated errors in the recognition process may have occurred and suggested that any false or inaccurate inclusion should be reviewed and removed through proper verification.

Officials from the Directorate of Mass Uprising Affairs also stated that if mistakes occurred in recognizing individuals as July martyrs, corrections would be made after further verification.

The growing controversy has intensified calls for transparent investigations, accountability in official documentation, and safeguards against the misuse of legal processes—especially where journalism and public trust are concerned.

Source : Kaler Kantho