Political row rattles police ranks
Concerns are mounting within the Bangladesh Police over allegations that the force has increasingly been subjected to political “tagging”, raising questions about professionalism, internal cohesion and administrative integrity.
Police, regarded as the primary institution responsible for maintaining internal law and order, is said to have faced growing politicisation over the past two decades.
Following the student–people’s mass uprising of July–August 2024, expectations were high that reforms would help transform the force into a more “people-friendly” institution.
However, recent developments suggest the persistence — if not intensification — of politically influenced practices.
At the time of the 13th national parliamentary election, an internal assessment of Superintendents of Police (SPs) across 64 districts indicated that 32 were considered Jamaat-leaning, 16 BNP-leaning, while 8 each were identified as Awami League-leaning and “moderate”.
Following the change in government, allegations have resurfaced that similar classification exercises are ongoing.
According to several SPs, lists have been prepared labelling officers as supporters or affiliates of various political groups, including the now-banned Awami League.
Officers claim such classifications are being made without proper verification or reliance on Special Branch (SB) reports.
“This type of political tagging is humiliating and creates discomfort in the workplace,” one senior officer said, expressing concern over the impact on morale and professionalism.
Investigations suggest that a section of officials may be exploiting these practices for personal advantage, allegedly targeting colleagues through politically motivated labelling.
This has reportedly contributed to internal divisions, mistrust and psychological strain within the force.
A recently leaked list of 27 officers — drawn from the 15th, 17th and 18th BCS (Police) batches — has intensified the controversy.
The document reportedly described officers as “hardcore Awami League-leaning” and included detailed personal and professional information, such as BP numbers, awards and academic qualifications.
Critics argue that such lists risk being used as tools for career disruption rather than administrative assessment.
At the field level, the role of SPs remains central to policing operations.
A separate confidential report, allegedly circulated through unofficial channels, categorised SPs across the country along political lines.
Observers note that such classifications have coincided with a series of transfers, including changes in at least nine districts — Sylhet, Mymensingh, Jamalpur, Habiganj, Barisal, Bogura, Magura, Madaripur and Khagrachhari.
Concerns have also emerged over the criteria for postings, with some officers alleging that perceived political alignment is increasingly overshadowing merit and professional competence.
Several serving SPs have rejected the labels attributed to them. Dhaka District SP Mizanur Rahman said that although he was promoted during the previous administration, he did not receive any significant posting, having served in a training capacity.
Gazipur SP Sharif Uddin stated, “I am not affiliated with any party.” Munshiganj SP Menhazul Alam similarly denied any political links and called for proper verification of such claims.
Chandpur SP Rabiul Hasan expressed frustration, suggesting that personal attributes were being misinterpreted. “My only ‘fault’ is practising my faith.
That has been misrepresented,” he said, adding that he remained committed to serving wherever assigned.
Gopalganj SP Md. Habibullah is a 27th batch Jamaat-leaning officer told New Nation: “I pray five times a day, I eat nothing forbidden. Perhaps it is because of my integrity that they have made me a Jamaat man. I am always ready for transfer.”
Others echoed similar sentiments, emphasising their professional identity as government employees rather than political actors.
Tangail SP Muhammad Shamsul Alam Sarkar said, “I have no identity beyond that of a government servant.”
The situation has raised broader concerns about internal pressures faced by officers.
Reports indicate that some may be subjected to mental and financial stress, with allegations that refusal to align with certain expectations could result in threats of dismissal or disciplinary proceedings.
Officials at the Ministry of Home Affairs acknowledged receiving numerous complaints regarding officers and batches but stressed that no action is taken without verification.
“No formal decision has been made on the basis of unverified information,” a ministry official said.
However, questions persist regarding the credibility and intent of such reports. Former Inspector General of Police (IGP) Mohammad Nurul Huda warned that political labelling within a disciplined force could undermine its internal environment.
“Posting decisions should be based on merit, integrity and competence. What is happening now appears to be influenced and could prove detrimental,” he said.
Another former IGP, Nur Mohammad, called for structural reforms, including the establishment of an independent police commission and the revision of the Police Act of 1861, to reduce political and administrative interference.
“If the police continue to be perceived as an instrument of political authority, public trust will remain elusive,” he noted.
Meanwhile, Police Headquarters officials maintain that monitoring and evaluation of officers are part of routine administrative processes.
DIG (Administration) Khandaker Nazmul Hasan said information is being collected from multiple sources and that further postings may follow after overall assessment.
As the debate continues, analysts caution that sustained reliance on politically influenced evaluations could erode institutional integrity and fuel unrest within the force, with potential implications for law enforcement effectiveness and public confidence.
