A Fractured Polity And A Flawed Civic Sphere: Can Civil Society Lead Bangladesh Forward? – OpEd
Bangladesh stands at a rare and delicate historical juncture. After years marked by heavyhanded governance, systemic corruption, and widespread humanrights abuses, the political order that dominated national life for more than a decade has finally collapsed under the weight of its own excesses. Numerous Bangladeshis experienced suffering that cannot be easily erased: extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests, political intimidation, and the dismantling of institutional checks on executive authority. The state’s sovereignty and dignity suffered further from deeply unpopular policies that appeared to bend national interests in favor of external powers. This long catalogue of grievances generated a powerful and understandable public sentiment that the leaders and operatives of the former regime should be held to account before being permitted to reenter normal political life.
In this context, the exclusion of the previous ruling party (Awami League) from the forthcoming elections—though regretted by some who preferred to see them defeated electorally—was not surprising. Many citizens did not wish to see individuals widely associated with abuses simply return to the public stage without any reckoning. Yet their exclusion alone does not resolve the larger challenge of rebuilding a democratic order in which elections are not merely symbolic exercises, but meaningful expressions of the popular will. Instead, the ban has led major political actors to adopt indirect strategies, including urging their followers to support aligned “Bteam” alternatives. Other parties with their own histories of moral and political shortcomings have attempted to reposition themselves as vehicles for protest votes. These dynamics reveal a fundamental fragility within Bangladesh’s electoral landscape: the absence of a unified, principled, meritbased political culture.
It is in this vacuum that civil society emerges as the most essential force capable of steering the nation toward a credible democratic transition. Yet any discussion of civil society’s potential must begin with a sober acknowledgement of its own historical shortcomings. For decades, much of Bangladesh’s civic establishment—comprised of prominent NGOs, intellectual circles, professional bodies, and mediaadjacent networks—operated not as an independent moral force but as an accessory to the prevailing power structure. Rather than reflecting the aspirations of ordinary citizens, segments of this sphere aligned themselves with elite interests, foreign hegemonic narratives, and selfserving ideological projects that had limited resonance with the broader public. As a result, civil society often appeared detached from grassroots realities while benefiting from proximity to authoritarian administrations and entrenched elements of the Deep State. When corruption infiltrates a system, decay typically begins at the top; in Bangladesh, many citizens came to view the civic elite as complicit actors rather than principled guardians of democracy. For civil society to credibly guide the present transition, it must therefore undergo its own renewal—rebuilding public trust, rediscovering its connection to ordinary people, and demonstrating through action that it is prepared to break with the opportunistic practices that once undermined its legitimacy.
Political parties, hamstrung by legacies of corruption, dynastic leadership, or tainted reputations, are currently illequipped to restore public trust on their own. State institutions, after years of politicization, have not yet regained the level of integrity or independence necessary to serve as the backbone of a restored democracy. Against these limitations, civil society stands out as an arena where Bangladeshis continue to organize, reflect, and mobilize around values rather than power.
One of the foremost roles of civil society in this environment is to rebuild the public’s trust in political processes. After the repeated manipulation of electoral systems, many Bangladeshis have developed a deep skepticism toward official declarations of neutrality. Civic groups can help restore public confidence by promoting transparency at every stage of the electoral cycle. This includes establishing citizenled monitoring networks, educating voters about their rights and the mechanics of the election, organizing impartial forums for candidate engagement, and combating the spread of misinformation. The credibility of the 2026 election—and the broader democratic future of the country—depends heavily on whether voters believe the process is fair. Civil society, with its reputation for independence, is uniquely positioned to reinforce that belief.
Yet restoring trust requires more than procedural oversight; it necessitates confronting the deeper cultural issues that have long undermined political life. For decades, Bangladeshi politics has been shaped by dynastic families, patronage networks, and personalitydriven factions that prioritize loyalty over merit and entitlement over service. The public has grown increasingly disillusioned with such patterns. As new alignments and surrogate parties emerge in the vacuum left by the former ruling party’s downfall, civil society must guide the country toward a more principled democratic ethic.
This involves actively encouraging the electorate to support honest, competent, and communityoriented candidates, rather than those backed by entrenched patronage networks or tainted party histories. Civil society organizations can nurture a political culture based on meritocracy by spotlighting candidates who demonstrate integrity, professional credibility, and a commitment to public service. Through debates, policy forums, academic analyses, and transparent evaluations, civic groups can reorient political discourse away from personality and toward substance. The election provides an opportunity to shift expectations: to encourage communities to value ethical leadership over family name, and public accountability over partisan loyalty.
Another critical role for civil society is its capacity to maintain peace and social stability during a volatile transition. Bangladesh’s political history is marked by cycles of confrontational street politics, retribution, and periods of escalating violence. With older political groups instructing supporters to vote strategically, and new actors attempting to consolidate control, tensions can easily flare. Civil society groups—including religious leaders, women’s networks, student unions, humanrights organizations, local elders, and cultural institutions—can serve as mediators in communities where competition or misunderstanding threatens to spill into conflict. Their presence in such contexts is invaluable: they can deescalate tensions, offer neutral channels for dialogue, guide communities toward lawful conduct, and provide early warnings of potential flashpoints. Elections held in an atmosphere of fear or intimidation cannot produce legitimate outcomes; civil society’s capacity to uphold peace is therefore essential to the integrity of the transition.
The relationship between civil society and the military is another important dimension of the transition process. The military currently plays a stabilizing role by maintaining order and protecting institutions during a moment of uncertainty. While many citizens appreciate this contribution, it is nevertheless crucial that the military’s role remain supportive rather than directive. Civil society can help ensure this balance by advocating for transparency in military operations, encouraging clear communication between security forces and communities, and publicly reaffirming the principle of civilian political authority. A respectful dialogue between civic actors and the military helps prevent misunderstandings and reinforces the shared national objective: a peaceful transition to a democratic order in which the military is a guarantor of stability, not a political actor.
Civil society must also engage in the longer, more complex work of revitalizing the institutions that underpin democratic governance. Years of politicization have weakened the judiciary, compromised the bureaucracy, and eroded the autonomy of regulatory agencies. The Election Commission—central to the credibility of the 2026 polls—requires not only technical competence but also public trust. Civil society can contribute meaningfully by monitoring institutional reforms, providing expert guidance, insisting on transparent appointments, and educating the public about the legal and administrative frameworks that shape the electoral process. Democracy cannot succeed if the institutions designed to safeguard it remain fragile or distrusted.
Another crucial area of involvement for civil society is the protection of communal harmony and minority rights. Moments of political transition can create openings for extremist rhetoric or targeted violence, particularly in a society as religiously and culturally diverse as Bangladesh. Civil society organizations must remain vigilant in safeguarding vulnerable communities, promoting interfaith dialogue, exposing attempts to instrumentalize religion or ethnicity for political gain, and advocating swift justice against perpetrators of communal violence. A peaceful and inclusive election is impossible if segments of the population feel threatened or marginalized.
Finally, civil society must act as the guardian of the nation’s democratic memory. Bangladesh’s recent history is marked by episodes of repression that cannot be forgotten if the country is to avoid repeating them. Documenting the abuses and corruption of the previous regime, collecting testimonies from victims, and preserving the truth of what occurred are all essential tasks. Without such documentation, future generations may lose sight of the costs of authoritarianism, and the political space could once again be captured by actors seeking to rewrite or sanitise the historical record. Civil society’s role in truthtelling ensures that accountability remains at the heart of the nation’s political evolution.
In sum, Bangladesh’s democratic renewal cannot depend solely on political parties, many of which remain compromised by history, internal dysfunction, or narrow selfinterest. Nor can the military or interim authorities, acting alone, create the conditions for longterm stability and legitimacy. Civil society stands as the moral and intellectual backbone of the nation, capable of guiding the transition with integrity, wisdom, and an unwavering commitment to the common good. By fostering trust, promoting ethical leadership, maintaining peace, supporting institutional reconstruction, protecting vulnerable communities, and preserving historical truth, civil society can help ensure that the 2026 election becomes a true turning point.
Bangladesh now has an opportunity—rare in its history—to imagine a political order grounded not in fear, patronage, or dynastic entitlement, but in the aspirations of its people. If civil society rises to this challenge, the nation may yet emerge from its period of turmoil with a more inclusive government, stronger institutions, and a renewed social contract anchored in justice and democratic dignity.
Final Takeaway
Yes — civil society can shape whether Bangladesh’s 2026 election becomes a democratic turning point or a repeat of Egypt’s cautionary tale. But it must act boldly, independently, and consistently, because the stakes are existential.