First Anniversary of July Uprising: How far have we come in a year?

On 5 August last year, the people of Bangladesh uprooted the Hasina regime after 36 days of violence.

In the aftermath of the July Uprising, which united people from all walks of life against autocracy, corruption and grave human rights violations, an interim government, led by Nobel laureate Professor Muhammad Yunus took charge on 8 August. Multiple commissions have since been formed to steer the country back towards the path of democracy and to undo the economic damage that the previous Awami League regime had left the countrymen with.

Now, a year later, political experts, a business leader and an economist discuss how far we have come since that fateful day.

Sketch: TBS

'Filing of false cases a continuation of Awami League legacy'

Shahdeen Malik; Jurist and legal expert

If I speak frankly about the state of the judiciary in the past year, I will be held in contempt. There is hardly anything good to say about it. One good thing is the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court. 

For the first time ever, applications were publicly invited through an advertisement on the Supreme Court website. The applications were then shortlisted, and candidates were interviewed by a seven-member committee. One round of selections have been completed. This was a transparent and open process, and in my view, it is the most significant legal step taken in the past year.

That said, much else has gone wrong. Around 5,000 lawyers were appointed last year. When taxpayer money is used to pay salaries, there should be a structured, accountable process. Instead, many of these appointments appear to have been made based on individual choices. They could have streamlined the selection for the public prosecution office. For example, advocates go through rigorous selection processes before we get our degree, but public prosecutors were appointed without following any open or accountable procedures. 

Another major concern is the overuse of ordinances. In 2024, there were already 24 ordinances issued. As of last week, that number had reached 39, which means over 60 ordinances so far. By definition, ordinances are temporary. They happen when there is no parliament. They expire after 30 days unless ratified by Parliament. If Parliament does not act on them within that timeframe, they automatically lapse. That puts all decisions made under these ordinances in legal jeopardy because these are temporary laws. I do not think they are thinking this through. 

Furthermore, the increase in false case filings has been a pure continuation of the Awami League legacy. This has been the most disappointing part. Thousands are rotting in jail without trial. There have been 1,400 killings but that does not justify detaining 20,000 people indefinitely without proper trials. 

This is one of the worst miscarriages of justice we have seen in the past year. Take Section 157 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It gives the police discretion to determine whether a case has merit. If someone reports losing an airplane in their garage, the police are not obliged to take that claim seriously. So when a murder case names 250 people, the police have the power to filter it down to the real suspects. But they are not doing so. This is not even about law, it is about common sense.

The ICT trials have just started and part of it is being telecasted, which is a positive sign and provides transparency. People are impatient — they want the trials to conclude. But in any country, trials involving serious charges and severe penalties, especially those with many witnesses, take time. These are complex and emotionally charged cases that cannot be rushed. I sincerely hope the process is not hastened just to meet political demands — that would only invite criticism, both domestically and internationally.

Even in countries with robust legal systems, these cases take decades. Just recently, the BBC reported on a man executed in Texas after a 36-year legal process. His trial and appeals spanned over 30 years. Bangladesh is not unique in this. Justice, when done properly, takes time.

My expectations for the future is that the judicial appointment process must be reformed. It needs to be transparent, merit-based. Appointments cannot continue to be made on the basis of party loyalty. The licensing of lawyers has  become partisan. If you are affiliated with the ruling party, your chances of being appointed improve drastically. This way, many lawyers are appointed who do not deserve it.

Another area for improvement is the budget. Here is something absurd no one talks about: At any given time there are only 1,700 lawyers and judges working in the lower courts. For a country with 170 million people, this is appalling — it contributes to an enormous backlog of cases, but no one is addressing it. The law ministry receives pitiful funding — less than 0.5% of the national budget. For comparison, the fisheries sector gets nearly double. We need to increase our budget.

TBS' Alhan Arsal spoke to Shahdeen Malik over the phone.

Sketch: TBS

'Dream of inclusive development still far from realisation'

Professor Mustafizur Rahman; Distinguished Fellow, Centre for Policy Dialogue 

A year ago, the economy was going through major challenges. At that time, we saw high inflationary pressure, people's declining purchasing power, a fall in the standard of living, and high unemployment rates. We also saw how various institutions were being weakened due to a lack of good governance. 

In addition, there were issues like money laundering and loan defaults. Altogether, there was a growing sense of discontent.

It was in such an economic situation that the interim government began its journey. Over the past year, several economic reform efforts have been undertaken. Some have brought success, while in other areas, the desired results are yet to be seen.

In particular, although our high inflation has come down somewhat, it still remains quite elevated. Even with a contractionary monetary policy, it could not be brought down significantly. As a result, we have not seen any major improvement in the living standards of ordinary people.

The effort to collect revenue through direct taxes and use it for social protection, education and healthcare to reduce inequality has not been very visible.

On the other hand, some positive initiatives have been taken in the banking sector. Steps have been taken to bring clarity in loan defaults, merge weak banks, recover assets, repatriate laundered money, and restructure boards. These are positive measures and will leave a good mark for the future economy.

However, in terms of macroeconomic management, we have not yet seen any major breakthroughs in redistribution, job creation, private sector investment, and other crucial areas. In these areas, our disappointment remains high. To move forward, and particularly to build an economy aligned with the spirit of the July Uprising, we must bring about change here.

One of the major reasons behind the July Uprising was the lack of good governance. Unfortunately, despite various reform initiatives, their implementation is facing obstacles.

I believe that the mass uprising took place with the dream of inclusive development, and we still have a long way to go to realise that vision.

TBS' Ariful Hasan Shuvo spoke to Mustafizur Rahman over the phone.

Sketch: TBS

'Noticeable gap between rhetoric and action in field of diplomacy'

Humayun Kabir; Former ambassador of Bangladesh to US

This is a mixed situation. The current government is facing numerous challenges, including internal issues and domestic pressures. Reforms are underway, there is political pressure, and amidst these developments, the July Charter has been announced. However, there appears to be a noticeable gap between the rhetoric and the actual activity in the field of diplomacy.

Take, for instance, the initiatives aimed at normalising relations with India. While we have made efforts, there has been little reciprocation from the Indian side. The reality is that our relationship with India remains opaque.

On the other hand, we have managed to navigate our ties with the US to some extent. Although they have imposed a 20% tariff, the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA) has indicated that the effective rate will be closer to 35%, since an earlier 15% tariff is being added on top. This means we have essentially arrived at the 35% figure the Americans initially proposed. Regardless, we have managed to avoid significant pressure, at least for now.

However, a new question emerges: How will we implement the decisions made in Washington? Implementation is not just about the tariff relief or the garment sector, where exports hit $8.4 billion last time and could rise further. Other crucial aspects tied to this process are being overlooked. These include domestic reforms related to taxes, import and export policies, tariffs, non-tariff and para-tariff barriers, and intellectual property rights. These areas are integral to our internal management.

There is a disproportionate focus on numbers — figures being highlighted as historic wins, while ignoring the pressing internal issues that will shape both foreign and domestic policy. This demands coordination, yet no such discussions or planning are currently visible.

Externally, the rivalry between China and the US — especially in the Indo-Pacific and Asia-Pacific regions — is intensifying. This strategic contest, driven by geography, economics, and military power, will continue to escalate. Our relationships with the US, China and India are deeply interconnected, and managing them requires clarity and foresight.

Over the past year, the government has not presented a concrete action plan or strategic direction in this regard. There have been surprising announcements, such as sending Rohingyas back or constructing corridors. These attract public attention but it remains unclear whether they have played any meaningful role in resolving problems or whether they are part of a consistent, systematic initiative.

Looking at South Asia, the longstanding Pakistan-India rivalry continues. Our relationship with India is strained, while attempts are underway to normalise ties with Pakistan. Regardless of the political leadership — current or future — our national interest must guide a balanced relationship with both countries, as well as others in South Asia.

These relationships must be rooted in self-respect and equality, as emphasised by the Chief Adviser. Even amid tensions with India and renewed engagements with Pakistan, our guiding principle must be whether such relations serve national interest, self-respect and equality. The same criteria should apply to our dealings with the US and China.

In the remaining tenure of this government, there is a need to strengthen foreign policy further. There is an undeniable link between our internal governance and external diplomatic activity. While there is heavy emphasis on numbers and achievements, it is clear that substantial internal reforms are necessary. The government could have given more attention to this connection, paving the way for future administrations to coordinate effectively and move Bangladesh toward tax democracy, while also conducting foreign affairs with dignity.

However, over the past year, no such initiative has been visible. Hopefully, there will be deeper consideration of these matters going forward.

Will our diplomatic process see a change when the next government comes in? The answer is uncertain. The current internal reform processes show no meaningful engagement with external relations. Yet it must be remembered: Bangladesh is a respected member of the global community. Our internal development, progress and stability are deeply connected to the outside world.

Budget support, Official Development Assistance, exports, imports, and remittances — all depend on international cooperation. For instance, the volume of remittances we receive is directly tied to how well we educate, modernise, and skill our labour force.

In every area — economic growth, job creation, connectivity, or shaping the future for our youth — external links matter. It is vital that the next government, whoever it may be, acknowledges this. They must engage meaningfully with our external partners, aligning foreign cooperation with internal progress.

The challenge ahead is to integrate these spheres — diplomacy and domestic reform — into a coherent strategy that secures Bangladesh's future with balance and foresight.

TBS' Nasif Tanjim spoke to Humayun Kabir over the phone.

Sketch: TBS

'Political parties have reverted to usual mudslinging, petty rivalries'

Altaf Parvez; Researcher, South and Southeast Asian history

There is no doubt that the primary objective of the movement was the removal of Sheikh Hasina's government. Bringing an end to the suffocating authoritarian regime that had lasted for 15 years — this was the fundamental goal of the uprising, and in that regard, it has succeeded. 

However, in the course of achieving that goal, several new aspirations became part of the movement.

Among those aspirations was a demand to transform the very systems of production, governance, and law, upon which the authoritarian structure had been built. The people of Bangladesh yearned for reforms in these areas. 

As the movement progressed and more lives were lost, these aspirations became ever more deeply intertwined with the cause. And when Sheikh Hasina fled the country, and the original objective of the movement was fulfilled, these newer aspirations assumed centre stage.

In that sense, the demand for justice against Sheikh Hasina and the realisation of these deeper systemic reforms have become the new core agenda of the movement. Yet, in the past year, we have seen very little progress on this front. One could argue that we have gained virtually nothing.

There are two main reasons behind this failure. 

Firstly, we are governed by a very weak administration, which has been unable to realise these aspirations within the span of a year. 

Admittedly, no one expected all demands to be implemented within 12 months. But there was an expectation that the government would at least take some bold and clear steps — signalling the beginning of meaningful change. That did not happen.

The government did form 11 commissions, but the recommendations made by these bodies were not implemented meaningfully. Some of the most critical reform suggestions, such as those related to administrative reform, police reform and women's rights, were not even brought into public discussion.

In the few cases where discussions were held, progress has remained minimal.

Another key issue is that the government has failed to preserve the unity among the forces that had come together during the popular uprising last year. In fact, after the government labelled one individual as the "mastermind" behind the events, others understandably chose to distance themselves.

The government also failed to build meaningful connections with citizens at the district and upazila levels. On the other hand, political parties have, in the aftermath of the uprising, reverted to their usual mudslinging and petty rivalries. 

Even the National Consensus Commission has failed to arrive at agreements on several key issues. This is largely because the general public is no longer present on the ground — something these parties have taken advantage of.

Indeed, the kind of dismissive language we now hear from political parties, such as "We will not deliver this," "We do not know," or "This will not happen", would have been unthinkable in August of last year. At that time, had anyone spoken in such terms, the public would have stood firmly against them.

Back then, the political forces were aligned with the people's demands. Now, those demands are being disregarded. As a result, the political parties have drifted away from the people's aspirations and the original goals of the movement. Their focus has now shifted solely to returning to power through elections. 

While elections are undeniably an important instrument of change, they are not enough. Much deeper reforms are needed. But the parties remain indifferent. They see this uprising not as an opportunity for transformation, but as a mere opportunity to reclaim power.

In my view, what we have received is a passive revolution — a compromise between the old and the present. The old order has not been dismantled. The public has been relegated to the gallery, reduced to the role of spectators. They have not been given any active role in shaping the future.

Nonetheless, I remain hopeful about the future. Regardless of which party assumes power, the core aspirations of the movement remain deeply rooted among the people. Should any party attempt to impose authoritarian rule once again, the youth and the people will surely rise up. If anyone attempts to govern without reform, they will not succeed.

TBS' Anonno Afroz spoke to him over the phone.

Sketch: TBS

'Stabilising banking sector, forex reserves have been key achievements'

Abul Kasem Khan; Chairperson, Business Initiative Leading Development (BUILD)

Some challenges in the country's economy and private sector had existed from before, and their impact is still continuing. 

However, over the past year, one positive development has been the growing stability in the banking sector due to certain initiatives. In addition, the decline in foreign reserves was a concern, but in these areas, the interim government and the Bangladesh Bank have handled the situation quite well.

That said, businesses and investors naturally do not have the same level of confidence in an interim government. As a result, there is still an air of uncertainty.

However, this government does show a willingness to address various issues. In other words, we are in a mixed situation.

Over the past year, we also hosted a large-scale investment summit. This was necessary to present Bangladesh on the global stage and to market the country. Given the political instability, it was important to convey to the world that Bangladesh is still ready for business. 

However, investment is an ongoing process, so the summit's impact will be understood in the future. 

Talks of reforms are nothing new — we have been discussing them year after year. However, in our country, the reform process has always been very slow. At the very least, we expect the interim government to implement them more swiftly.

If the government could have implemented reforms more quickly, the investment potential would have increased even further, and eventually could help the private sector as well.

We often talk about ease of doing business. To achieve this, reforms must be implemented quickly, and business processes need to be simplified.

Now, we expect that the interim government will announce a roadmap for quick elections. This will be good for the private sector, as it will reduce uncertainty for everyone.

TBS' Ariful Hasan Shuvo spoke to Abul Kasem Khan over the phone.

Sketch: TBS

'Mandate period is over, now time for fair elections and end of mob violence'

Firoz Ahmed; Member, Constitution Reform Commission

In my assessment, the interim government has succeeded in two major areas. 

First, after Hasina's departure, there was a strong possibility of widespread unrest in the country. They managed to protect Bangladesh from that, which was a significant achievement. 

Secondly, the country's banking sector was on the verge of collapse, and they were able to save Bangladesh from that crisis as well.

However, the interim government could have implemented certain reforms even before amending the constitution, reforms that aligned with the aspirations of the mass uprising. But the foundations of Sheikh Hasina's fascist regime were left entirely untouched, which is dangerous. One could say the interim government lacked the intellectual preparedness to dismantle those structures, or perhaps they simply were not interested. I do not know the reason.

For instance, police reform in Bangladesh was urgently needed. Under the previous government, the police were placed in direct confrontation with the people. It was the interim government's responsibility to establish an independent commission to investigate police conduct and to define clear standards for police-community relations. But they failed to do so.

It was crucial for the interim government to set a strong precedent by making substantial investments in the education and health sectors. This would have made it difficult for any future government to roll back such initiatives overnight. 

If public expectations around these sectors had been raised, it would have created sustained pressure on successive governments to maintain or even expand those allocations. But the interim government failed to take that step.

Take our bureaucracy, for example: It operates with extreme secrecy. Even when we try, it is difficult to access key information, such as how much money is being allocated to specific components of a project and whether those allocations are justified. As a result, every sector in the country is riddled with corruption, which is an integral part of the economic structure of authoritarianism. The interim government took no meaningful steps to reform this system. They failed to introduce mechanisms for transparency and accountability.

Even so, I would like to highlight two reasons for hope.

First, the Awami League had built a structure of oppression, control, and intimidation at the grassroots level through its student and youth wings — Chhatra League and Jubo League in every district, every ward, every village. That structure has now collapsed. While extortion is still being reported in some areas, the system of repression through mechanisms like "guest rooms" and "mass rooms" has not yet been re-established. I hope that in the future, students and the public will not allow such a system to rise again.

Secondly, the old, traditional intellectual class in Bangladesh has become obsolete. The people have rejected them. As a result, the stagnant intellectual structures that once dominated the country — whether in matters of society, the state, gender, or other issues — have been effectively dismantled.

However, I do not have high expectations from the government itself. When it comes to reform, it has to be done in the very first wave. When Dr Yunus first arrived, he had massive public support. That moment could have been used to implement major reforms. 

For example, when he first addressed the nation a year ago, he spoke about everyone's right to live with dignity in this country. He even mentioned the Qadiani community. But today, he likely wouldn't dare to say such things because that public support is no longer there. The sense of national unity has been fractured, and the public's belief that he could bring meaningful reform has faded as well.

Now, I have only a few modest expectations from Dr Yunus and his government. 

First, that they ensure a free and fair election at the earliest opportunity, recognising that the popular mandate they once enjoyed has significantly eroded. Second, that the current reign of mob rule is brought to an end — where offices are being occupied, homes vandalised, women harassed, and people killed. This culture of mob violence must be stopped, not only for the sake of public safety and security today, but also to uphold the rule of law for the future.