Upashana Salam

On 27 August, protesting students from the Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET) and several other engineering universities were intercepted by law enforcement agencies and dispersed with tear gas, sound grenades, batons, and water cannons. Earlier on 25 March, a clash broke out between police and garment workers after law enforcers charged at them with batons and allegedly deployed sound grenades and tear gas in response to demonstrations over unpaid wages, Eid bonuses, and leave. And on March 12, several private primary school teachers were also charged with batons and water cannons while protesting for the nationalisation of their schools. 

These incidents, occurring months after the fall of the Awami League regime in August 2025, reveal how elusive accountability remains, further intensifying widespread public distrust. The police continue to use excessive force against citizens exercising their right to protest, justifying their actions as retaliation against protesters who attacked them. It is deeply concerning that the culture of impunity, evident before and during the July 2024 revolution, still casts its shadow over the country.

The July 2024 uprising revealed the extent of political control over policing. Yet, this is only a part of a broader pattern, as reports of torture and abuse in custody continue to surface. In August 2025, Durjoy Chowdhury, an office assistant at a government school in Chakaria, Cox’s Bazar, died while in police custody. Police claimed he took his own life, but his family alleged custodial abuse. Similarly, in October 2024, Raihan Ahmed was picked up by police in Sylhet and died the next day. Following a case filed under the Torture and Custodial Death (Prevention) Act by his wife, an investigation team of Sylhet Metropolitan Police confirmed that Raihan had been tortured in custody. The main accused has since been released on bail. 

A functional democracy requires accountable and transparent law enforcement. While the formation of the Police Reform Commission is a welcome first step, similar initiatives were launched in previous years and failed to carry any meaningful change. In 2005, a police reform programme was initiated to fulfil a vision of five fundamental strategic changes: organisational reform, community policing, enhanced training, gender inclusion and sensitisation, and IT integration. However, the proposals were largely rejected by police personnel, particularly senior officials. While some limited reforms were implemented (such as the inclusion of women officials), citizen-centric ideas were mostly discarded. 

The most important stakeholders in police reform are the citizens themselves. That is why citizen-centred policing—grounded in robust public oversight and accountability—is essential for meaningful change. A paper published by the BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), “A People’s Police:

Reform Suggestions for a Democratic Police,” by Faruq Hossain, Inteemum Ahsan, and Md Al-Mamun, explains that while people acknowledge the “centrality of the institution in upholding law and order”, they also believe that any effective reform must requires structural changes paired with changes in the police-citizen relationship. Based on a study conducted in the Tala Thana, Satkhira, the paper includes interviews with teachers, businesspersons, farmers, housewives, students, politicians, retired service holders, police personnel, and local government representatives. 

In Bangladesh, the police are often viewed as serving ruling-party interests, wielding coercive and repressive power against the public. When a new political party comes to power, the police are often subjected to various harassment and psunishment, such as transfers or demotions, for having served the interests of the previous regime. 

Democratic policing, on the other hand, emphasises “mutual cooperation”, where citizens and the police work together to establish trust and ensure equitable policing practices. BIGD’s paper suggests that in a democratic model of policing, citizens would feel empowered to support the police, instead of viewing them as a repressive force or an instrument of the regime. Such a system could pressure political power to reconsider their exploitation of law enforcement for partisan gain, as democratic control and public scrutiny would heighten demands for accountability.

Respondents of the BIGD study suggested several types of reforms, emphasising a strong interest in a community-driven approach to accountability, with suggestions ranging from “deploying monitoring cells, involving third parties in conflict resolution by deploying a neutral party,” to “fostering reciprocity between the police and the public, and building stronger connections with the police”. Building on these ideas, the study proposes the establishment of citizen-led, thana-based committees to support local police in maintaining peace, reporting law violations, and raising public awareness about police procedures and citizens’ rights. 

The committee, comprising up to 15 people, would be selected through deliberative community elections — with members including teachers, socially influential individuals, student leaders, non-governmental organisation workers, retired government officials and union chairpersons, alongside partisan individuals from the local community, irrespective of wealth, religion, gender, or other discriminating factors. The selection will be a discussion-based process rather than a vote-based one. The OC of the thana would serve as the committee’s member secretary, responsible for convening meetings every three months. To prevent political subservience, the committee’s tenure should be half that of the central government. 

Respondents also advocated for a legal framework to ensure legitimacy and public trust. Apart from administrative and social recognition, the committee should hold limited authority to enforce its decisions, supported by capacity-building and transparency measures to prevent corruption. To insulate the police from political manipulation, a bipartisan, parliament-centred model of accountability—established through a clear and transparent oversight mechanism—has been proposed. There are concerns that political actors may resist the formation of such a committee as well as doubts about its ability to be truly non-partisan and inclusive. However, with a strong legal framework and parliamentary backing, a people-centred committee could lay the groundwork for a police force that serves the public interest rather than the agenda of the ruling regime. 
____________________________________
The writer is the Senior Communications Manager at the BRAC Institute of Governance and Development, BRAC University