Bangladesh Untold

Blog

  • Five Years at the Bottom: How Bangladesh Became the World’s Most Corrupt Country

    Five Years at the Bottom: How Bangladesh Became the World’s Most Corrupt Country

    Five Years at the Bottom: How Bangladesh Became the World’s Most Corrupt Country

    In October 2001, Transparency International published its annual Corruption Perceptions Index. Bangladesh sat at the very bottom — dead last out of 91 countries surveyed, with a score of 1.2 out of 10.

    Nobody in Dhaka was surprised. But nobody expected what came next.

    For five consecutive years — 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 — Bangladesh held the same position. Rock bottom. The world’s most corrupt nation. A title that no country had ever held for that long.

    The man who presided over this unprecedented stretch was Tarique Rahman. Operating from Hawa Bhaban, his parallel government office in Gulshan, he turned Bangladesh into what US Ambassador James Moriarty would later call “a symbol of kleptocratic government.”

    The Numbers

    Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index ranked countries on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 meant a country was perceived as entirely corrupt and 10 meant entirely clean. Bangladesh’s scores during the BNP-Jamaat era:

    2001: Score 1.2 — Ranked last out of 91 countries
    2002: Score 1.2 — Ranked last out of 102 countries
    2003: Score 1.3 — Ranked last out of 133 countries
    2004: Score 1.5 — Ranked last out of 146 countries
    2005: Score 1.7 — Ranked last out of 159 countries

    Each year, the index expanded to include more nations. Each year, Bangladesh still found itself at the bottom. By 2005, when TI surveyed 159 countries, Bangladesh remained the single most corrupt nation on the planet. That meant it ranked below countries ravaged by civil war, below military dictatorships, below narco-states.

    The Daily Star headline on October 19, 2005 said it plainly: “TI brands Bangladesh most corrupt for fifth time.”

    What the Index Actually Measured

    The CPI was not a measure of individual corruption cases or prosecuted offenses. It was a composite index drawing from multiple international surveys — assessments by business executives, country analysts, and risk consultants from institutions including the World Economic Forum, the Economist Intelligence Unit, and the World Bank.

    These were not political opponents or partisan actors. They were multinational business people and independent analysts who had direct experience operating in Bangladesh’s commercial environment. Their perceptions were shaped by what they encountered: kickbacks on government procurement, bribes for licences, extortion at every level of bureaucracy.

    Transparency International was clear about what the scores represented. Peter Eigen, TI’s chairman, stated in 2002:

    “Corrupt political elites in the developing world, working hand-in-hand with greedy business people and unscrupulous investors, are putting private gain before the welfare of citizens and the economic development of their countries.”

    That description fit Bangladesh with surgical precision.

    The Hawa Bhaban Machine

    The corruption was not incidental. It was organized.

    Hawa Bhaban — Tarique Rahman’s political office in Dhaka’s Gulshan neighbourhood — functioned as a parallel government. Tarique, as senior vice-chairman of BNP and son of Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, controlled a patronage network that reached into every ministry, every state-owned enterprise, and every major procurement decision.

    The US Embassy in Dhaka documented the scale in a classified cable dated November 3, 2008, later released by WikiLeaks. Ambassador James Moriarty wrote:

    “Tarique is a symbol of kleptocratic government and violent politics in Bangladesh.”

    The cable listed specific corruption transactions:

    Siemens: Tarique received approximately 2% commission on all Siemens deals in Bangladesh, paid in US dollars. The case was pursued by the US Department of Justice’s Asset Forfeiture unit and the FBI.

    Harbin Company (Chinese): Paid $750,000 to Tarique. The money was physically transported to Singapore for deposit at Citibank.

    Monem Construction: Paid $450,000 in bribes to Tarique for government contracts.

    Kabir Murder Case: Tarique accepted 210 million taka ($3.1 million) to obstruct a murder prosecution. Sanvir Sobhan, son of the Bashundhara Group chairman, had been accused of killing Humayun Kabir. Tarique took the money to make the case disappear.

    Zia Orphanage Trust: Tarique looted 20 million taka from a fund designated for orphans. The money was diverted to purchase land and finance BNP election campaigns.

    Al Amin Construction: The owner was threatened with closure of his business unless he paid $150,000 to Tarique.

    Ambassador Moriarty’s conclusion was unambiguous:

    “In short, much of what is wrong in Bangladesh can be blamed on Tarique and his cronies. His flagrant disregard for the rule of law has provided potent ground for terrorists to gain a foothold in Bangladesh.”

    The same cable noted that through 2006, “the nation topped Transparency International’s ranking of the world’s most corrupt governments four years in a row” and that “corruption has lowered Bangladesh’s growth rate by two percent per year.”

    The BNP Response: Shoot the Messenger

    Rather than address the findings, BNP leaders attacked Transparency International directly.

    When Bangladesh was ranked last for the fifth consecutive year in 2005, BNP officials questioned the methodology. They claimed the CPI was based on “perceptions” rather than hard data — as if the experience of hundreds of international business people and risk analysts operating in Bangladesh was irrelevant.

    Some BNP voices even suggested that TI was politically motivated, working at the behest of Western governments hostile to Bangladesh. This was a familiar playbook: when the evidence is devastating, attack the source.

    But Transparency International was not a partisan organisation. It had no stake in Bangladeshi politics. Its rankings covered every country in the world, and Bangladesh’s position at the bottom was consistent across multiple independent surveys, each using different methodologies and different respondent pools. The convergence was overwhelming.

    The later BNP-aligned revisionist narrative — that the 2001 CPI actually measured perceptions from the final year of the preceding Awami League government (2000), not the BNP era — is technically half-true. The 2001 index did incorporate survey data from the previous year. But it also captured data from 2001 itself, when BNP was already in power. And the subsequent four indices — 2002 through 2005 — were unambiguously measuring perceptions formed entirely during BNP-Jamaat rule. There is no version of reality in which five consecutive last-place finishes belong to anyone else’s tenure.

    The Cost of Corruption

    The WikiLeaks cable cited a damning statistic: corruption reduced Bangladesh’s economic growth by an estimated 2% per year during the BNP era.

    For a country where per capita income was among the lowest in the world, that was catastrophic. Two percent of GDP, year after year, meant billions of dollars in lost development, lost infrastructure, lost opportunity. It meant hospitals that were never built, schools that were never opened, roads that were never paved — because the money went into private pockets instead.

    The World Bank estimated at the time that global bribery cost the developing world roughly $1 trillion annually. Bangladesh, with its population of 140 million people, was contributing more than its proportional share.

    The International Fallout

    Bangladesh’s corruption ranking had concrete diplomatic consequences.

    In 2008, Ambassador Moriarty invoked Presidential Proclamation 7750 to request that Tarique Rahman be banned from entering the United States for “egregious political corruption.” The US government formally designated him a corrupt official. He was barred from American soil.

    The Siemens case led to active FBI and DOJ investigations. In September 2018, FBI Special Agent Debra LaPrevotte flew to Dhaka and testified before a Bangladeshi court that the FBI had found Tarique Rahman and Giasuddin Al Mamun had siphoned Tk 20.41 crore to a Singaporean bank account. Tarique’s lawyers boycotted the hearing. The court convicted him anyway.

    The UN pulled its observers from Bangladesh’s 2007 election preparations, citing the impossibility of a free vote under those conditions. The European Union followed. The international community’s judgment was unified: Bangladesh under BNP had become too corrupt to trust with its own democratic process.

    The Paradox of Improvement

    There is an irony worth noting. Bangladesh’s CPI score did inch upward during the BNP era — from 1.2 in 2001 to 2.0 by 2006. Some BNP defenders point to this as evidence of improvement.

    But a score of 2.0 out of 10 is still abysmal. It means Bangladesh was still perceived as overwhelmingly corrupt — just slightly less overwhelming than before. Moving from catastrophic to merely disastrous is not a success story. A patient whose temperature drops from 107°F to 104°F is still in critical condition.

    And the slight improvement was largely driven by the creation of the Anti-Corruption Commission in 2004, a reform forced by international pressure. The ACC was deliberately weakened from birth — underfunded, understaffed, and structurally dependent on the government it was supposed to investigate. It was a Potemkin institution: a reform in name only.

    What Happened After

    When the caretaker government took power in January 2007, it launched the most aggressive anti-corruption drive in Bangladesh’s history. Dozens of politicians, including Tarique Rahman himself, were arrested. The Anti-Corruption Commission was finally given real authority. The CPI score ticked up slightly to 2.1 — still terrible, but the best Bangladesh had ever managed.

    Then the Awami League returned to power in 2009. Over the next fifteen years, the CPI score stagnated and eventually declined. By 2024, Bangladesh scored 23 out of 100 on the new scale — its worst performance in thirteen years, ranking 151st out of 180 countries. Transparency International attributed the decline to deep political influence over oversight bodies, weak enforcement of anti-corruption laws, and the declining autonomy of the Anti-Corruption Commission.

    The lesson is clear. Both major parties have been corrupt. But the BNP-Jamaat era was distinguished not by ordinary corruption — it was distinguished by the sheer scale, the brazenness, and the global recognition. Five consecutive years at the bottom of the world’s most respected corruption index. That is not a political talking point. That is a documented historical fact.

    Why It Still Matters

    In March 2025, the Appellate Division acquitted Tarique Rahman in the money laundering case. Every major corruption conviction from the BNP era has been overturned since the 2024 political change. The court records have been rewritten. The convictions have been erased.

    But the Transparency International rankings cannot be appealed. The WikiLeaks cables cannot be acquiesced. The FBI testimony cannot be dismissed as partisan. The five years at the bottom of the CPI are etched into the international record.

    Tarique Rahman may have been acquitted in a Dhaka courtroom. But the world’s verdict was delivered long ago — and it was unanimous.

    Sources: Transparency International CPI Reports 2001-2006; WikiLeaks Cable 08DHAKA1143_a (US Embassy Dhaka, Nov 3, 2008); The Daily Star, Oct 19, 2005; Gulf News, Sep 15, 2018 (FBI Agent Debra LaPrevotte testimony); US Department of Justice Country Conditions Report; World Bank Governance Indicators; Anti-Corruption Commission Bangladesh records.

  • As If Bangladesh Has No 1/11 Problem: The Farce of Charging a Three-Star General With Street Murder

    As If Bangladesh Has No 1/11 Problem: The Farce of Charging a Three-Star General With Street Murder

    On March 23, 2026, retired Lieutenant General Masud Uddin Chowdhury was dragged from his home in Baridhara DOHS by the Detective Branch of Dhaka Metropolitan Police. The man who once strode into Bangabhaban in armed capacity on January 11, 2007 — the day the state of emergency was declared — now sat in the back of a police microbus, a camera phone recording his passage through a justice system that bears little resemblance to one he once commanded.

    Masud Uddin Chowdhury’s court appearance — March 2026

    What happened next tells you everything about where Bangladesh stands in 2026 — and why the question of 1/11 remains as unresolved as ever.

    The ICT Detour: A Case That Never Reached the Tribunal

    By legal logic and by the government’s own framing, Masud Uddin Chowdhury should have been produced before the International Crimes Tribunal-2. The ICT prosecution itself filed an application on March 29, 2026, seeking to show Chowdhury arrested in connection with allegations of mass killings during the July Uprising — a case that falls squarely under the Tribunal’s jurisdiction over crimes against humanity.

    The ICT-2, led by Justice Nazrul Islam Chowdhury, ordered authorities to produce him before the tribunal on April 7.

    He never arrived.

    Instead, Chowdhury was held in DB custody. His name was added to an existing FIR — a murder case filed with Mirpur Model Police Station over the killing of one Delowar Hossain during a July 2024 protest. A case where his name had not originally appeared. The case was filed nearly a year after the incident, on July 6, 2025, by the victim’s wife. Chowdhury’s name was included alongside dozens of others in that lump-sum fashion that has become the defining feature of post-uprising justice in Bangladesh — where over 100,000 people have been named as accused across more than 1,930 cases, where dead people have been listed as deceased in one case and alive in another, where fake victims have been invented for extortion.

    From the ICT — a tribunal designed for crimes against humanity — to a magistrate’s court hearing a single murder case. That is the trajectory. And it is not accidental.

    “Ami Eka Ekjon Manush Kor Jaygay Giye Giye Murder Korsi!”

    When Masud Uddin Chowdhury was finally produced before the lower court, the prosecution read out the charges. Murder during the July Uprising. A former three-star general, coordinator of the National Coordination Committee on Combating Serious Crimes, former High Commissioner to Australia, former Member of Parliament — accused of going place to place killing people one by one.

    He laughed.

    “Ami eka ekjon manush kor jaygay giye giye murder korsi!” — “I went from place to place killing people one by one!”

    He said it while the court listened. He said it while the absurdity of the accusation hung in the air like smoke. A three-star general, a man who commanded divisions and coordinated national anti-corruption operations, reduced to a name dumped into a mass murder case alongside strangers — accused of personally roaming the streets of Mirpur shooting protesters.

    No lawyer appeared on his behalf during the remand hearing. Not because he couldn’t find one. Because the system had already decided what role he would play.

    The Lump-Sum Justice Machine

    This is not about one man’s innocence or guilt. This is about a pattern — a system of post-uprising cases that has been documented, criticized, and acknowledged even by the Inspector General of Police himself.

    Sheikh Hasina has been named in 663 cases. Over 100,000 people stand accused across 1,930 cases. Charge sheets have been submitted in only 19. The Transparency International Bangladesh survey flagged the problem. The Business Standard documented case after case where false victims were invented, where the dead were reported alive, where personal land disputes were repackaged as July Uprising murder cases.

    When a case names 200 people for a single death, it is not justice. It is a net. When a former army chief gets dropped into that net alongside common criminals and political nobodies, it tells you the net was never about catching the guilty. It was about catching someone — anyone — who the new government wants behind bars.

    As of May 4, 2026, Masud Uddin Chowdhury has been on continuous remand for over six weeks. Five days here, four days there, three more days, another four — a carousel of remand hearings that has no visible endpoint. The DB has interrogated him about 1/11, about the caretaker government, about the anti-corruption drives, about his relationship with the Awami League. None of these are the charges in the murder case. None of these are what the court authorized remand for. But the questions keep coming, because the case is a vehicle — the destination is 1/11.

    As If Bangladesh Has No 1/11 Problem

    The BNP came to power in February 2026 calling itself a victim of 1/11. Tarique Rahman — now Prime Minister — was arrested during that period. He has publicly alleged torture. The party’s narrative is straightforward: 1/11 was a conspiracy, its architects must face consequences, and the BNP’s suffering entitles it to a reckoning.

    Fair enough. But a reckoning pursued through lump-sum murder cases in magistrate courts — while the ICT exists precisely for this purpose — is not a reckoning. It is revenge dressed in legal clothing.

    If 1/11 was a crime against the democratic will of the Bangladeshi people, then try it as such. Constitute the charges. Present the evidence. Let the ICT do what it was designed to do. Let the accused face their accusers with legal representation, with due process, with the transparency that a tribunal provides.

    Instead, what Bangladesh has is a man who was supposed to go to the ICT, held in a police detective branch cell, questioned about everything except the actual charges on paper, and remanded in a lower court murder case that names him alongside strangers for a death he had no plausible connection to.

    This is not accountability. This is a workaround.

    And the reason for the workaround is clear: the ICT has rules. It has procedures. It has a public record. A magistrate’s court hearing a remand application at the speed of a rubber stamp does not.

    The Bigger Question Nobody Wants to Answer

    Here is the question that neither side in Bangladesh’s political establishment wants to confront: Was 1/11 justified?

    Not whether it was legal. Not whether the military should intervene in politics — it shouldn’t, and every democratic principle says so. But whether the conditions that triggered it — the corruption, the violence, the stolen elections, the grenade attacks, the arms smuggling, the five consecutive years as the world’s most corrupt country — whether those conditions created a genuine crisis of governance that the political system was incapable of resolving on its own.

    The answer is uncomfortable for everyone.

    For the BNP, the answer is no, because acknowledging the crisis means acknowledging that their government created it. The post-election rapes of 2001, the August 21 grenade attack that killed 24, the Chittagong arms haul of 4,930 guns and 27,020 grenades, Operation Clean Heart’s 44 custody deaths, RAB’s 600+ extrajudicial killings, Hawa Bhaban’s parallel government, Transparency International’s five-year corruption crown — none of this existed, apparently. 1/11 was just a conspiracy by power-hungry generals.

    For the Awami League, the answer is complicated, because they benefited from 1/11 more than anyone. Sheikh Hasina’s government was the product of the December 2008 election that the caretaker government made possible. She extended Masud Uddin Chowdhury’s tenure as High Commissioner to Australia three times. As researcher Mohiuddin Ahmad noted: “Among the major actors of 1/11, Masud Uddin Chowdhury was the only one who was rewarded during the Awami League government’s tenure.”

    For the military, the answer is dangerous, because it forces a conversation about the limits of institutional power and the precedent set every time generals decide the politicians have failed.

    And for the Bangladeshi people, the answer is the hardest of all: when your government steals from orphans, smuggles weapons to foreign insurgents, rapes minorities after elections, and earns the title of the world’s most corrupt country five years running — what exactly are you supposed to do? Wait for the next election that will be rigged anyway?

    The Courtroom That Tells the Whole Story

    On March 24, 2026, as Masud Uddin Chowdhury was led through the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, a man threw dirty water at him. Police couldn’t prevent it. They escorted him away quickly.

    A three-star general. A former High Commissioner. A former MP. And someone threw dirty water at him in a court of law, because the system that arrested him — the same system that was supposed to try him properly — couldn’t even guarantee his dignity in a public building.

    That image — the general being splashed with dirty water in a court corridor — is the image of Bangladesh’s justice system in 2026. Not the tribunal. Not the process. Not the evidence. Just dirty water, thrown by a stranger, in a building where justice is supposed to live.

    Masud Uddin Chowdhury laughed in court because the alternative was to weep at what his country has become. The accusations against him — one man going place to place committing murders — are so farcical that even the accused could only laugh. But the system that produced those accusations, the lump-sum justice machine that dumps names into cases like ingredients into a blender, the magistrate courts that grant remand like vending machines dispensing candy — that is not funny. That is the architecture of political persecution wearing the robes of due process.

    As if Bangladesh has no 1/11 problem. As if the crisis that triggered the caretaker government was invented. As if the five years of world-record corruption, the grenade attacks, the arms smuggling, the minority persecution, the extrajudicial killings — as if none of it happened, and 1/11 was just a power grab by ambitious generals who wanted to hurt the BNP.

    The BNP wants you to believe that. The current Prime Minister — the man who was arrested during 1/11, who alleged torture, who spent years in exile — has every personal reason to want you to believe that. But the historical record does not support it. The international sources do not support it. And the court of public opinion — the one that celebrated in the streets when the caretaker government finally acted — does not support it either.

    Try 1/11 properly or don’t try it at all. But don’t dress up political score-settling as murder cases. Don’t hold a man in a detective branch cell while the tribunal waits. Don’t dump his name into a lump-sum case alongside 200 strangers and call it justice. And don’t pretend that the conditions which made 1/11 possible never existed — because if you erase that history, you guarantee that those conditions will return.

    The dirty water will wash off. The farcical charges will eventually collapse. But the precedent being set — that the ruling party can use the lower courts to punish political enemies while avoiding the scrutiny of a proper tribunal — that precedent will stain Bangladesh’s justice system long after every remand hearing is over.

    Ami eka ekjon manush kor jaygay giye giye murder korsi. He said it laughing. But the joke is on Bangladesh.

  • Khamba Tarique: The Power Sector Scandal That Left Bangladesh in the Dark

    Khamba Tarique: The Power Sector Scandal That Left Bangladesh in the Dark

    The Poles That Stole a Nation’s Electricity

    In the summer of 2006, a farmer in rural Bogra stood in his field and stared at a concrete pole sticking out of the ground. It had been there for two years. No wires. No transformer. No connection to any grid. Just a gray column of concrete, baking in the sun, doing absolutely nothing.

    He was not alone. Across Bangladesh, thousands of these poles stood like sentinels of a theft so brazen it earned the man behind it a nickname that has followed him for two decades: Khamba Tarique. Pole Tarique. The man who turned concrete cylinders into the most expensive decorative items in South Asia.

    Between 2001 and 2006, the BNP-Jamaat government spent billions of taka on rural electrification. Thousands of electric poles were purchased at inflated prices and installed across the countryside. A significant number were never connected to anything. The money vanished. The poles remained. And Bangladesh sat in the dark — 16 to 18 hours of load shedding every single day.

    A Country in the Dark

    Imagine running a factory and having electricity for six hours out of twenty-four. Imagine being a surgeon mid-operation when the lights cut out. Imagine a student trying to study for exams by candlelight — not in the 1800s, but in 2006, in a country with a GDP growth rate of nearly 7%.

    This was Bangladesh under BNP rule. The economy was surging. Garments exports were booming. Foreign investment was flowing in. And yet the power sector was in freefall.

    Transparency International had already ranked Bangladesh the most corrupt country on earth for five consecutive years — 2001 through 2005. The power sector was ground zero for that corruption. And at the center of it sat a political operator whose office wasn’t in any ministry building, but in a nondescript complex called Hawa Bhaban.

    Hawa Bhaban: The Parallel Government

    Officially, Hawa Bhaban was the BNP chairman’s office. In practice, it was the clearing house for every major government contract during Khaleda Zia’s 2001-2006 tenure. Tarique Rahman, the Prime Minister’s eldest son, operated from this building as what US diplomats would later call “a parallel power centre where government contracts were influenced in exchange for bribes.”

    A 2008 US diplomatic cable — classified CONFIDENTIAL and later released by WikiLeaks — described Tarique Rahman as

    “notorious for flagrantly and frequently demanding bribes in connection with government procurement actions and appointments to political office.”

    The cable went further. Ambassador James F. Moriarty wrote:

    “Tarique is a symbol of kleptocratic government and violent politics in Bangladesh.”

    The power sector was one of Hawa Bhaban’s most lucrative prey.

    The Minister Who Knew Too Much

    In 2001, Khaleda Zia appointed Iqbal Hasan Mahmud as State Minister for Power. His job was to expand electricity access across Bangladesh. Instead, he presided over one of the most spectacular collapses of a power system in recent memory.

    Under his watch, power generation actually declined. Not a single megawatt was added to the national grid during the entire BNP tenure. The country’s existing power plants deteriorated from neglect. Load shedding became a way of life — 16 to 18 hours a day in many areas.

    Teachers held classes by candlelight. In broad daylight. Farmers couldn’t run irrigation pumps. Industrial production ground to a halt. Crime spiked in neighborhoods that went dark at 6 PM.

    On May 21, 2006, the government finally sacked Iqbal Hasan Mahmud.

    His replacement, Major (Retd.) Anwarul Kabir Talukdar, walked into the ministry and found a crime scene. After inspecting the documents, he went public with what he found:

    “There were anomalies every day during the previous minister’s tenure. Staff under the previous minister got involved in this corruption. Crores of taka have been embezzled daily in the name of power plant repair. But there is no account of the project. Thousands of crores of money have been looted and swindled.”

    The numbers were staggering. Thousands of crores of taka — billions in today’s terms — had been siphoned through fictitious repair projects, inflated procurement contracts, and phantom installations.

    Iqbal Hasan Mahmud’s defense was revealing. He didn’t deny the corruption. He said:

    “The aim was to work properly. But I could not do anything due to surrounding pressure and various complications.”

    The “surrounding pressure” was Hawa Bhaban. No one in the government dared interfere with Tarique Rahman’s operations.

    Khamba Limited: How It Worked

    The scheme was elegant in its simplicity. Bangladesh’s Rural Electrification Board needed electric poles — thousands of them — to expand the national grid into villages and towns that had never had power. The procurement contracts for these poles were routed through Hawa Bhaban.

    Poles were purchased from companies connected to Tarique Rahman’s associates at prices far above market rate. They were then installed across rural Bangladesh with great fanfare — ribbon-cuttings, press releases, promises of electrification.

    The problem was that many of the poles were never connected to any power line. No wires. No transformers. No substations. Just concrete posts standing in fields, beside roads, in village squares — monuments to a theft that everyone could see but no one could stop.

    The total amount embezzled through this single scheme has been estimated at Tk 20,000 crore — approximately $2.9 billion at the time. That figure comes from multiple Bangladeshi news sources who reported on the scandal during and after the BNP’s tenure.

    The nickname stuck. Khamba Tarique. It appeared in newspaper headlines, in opposition speeches, in dinner-table conversation across the country. When Time magazine profiled Tarique Rahman in January 2026 — after his return from exile and election as Prime Minister — they noted that “to many Bangladeshis, Rahman is still snidely known as Khamba Tarique.”

    The One Achievement

    There is one documented power-sector achievement from the BNP’s 2001-2006 tenure. On September 3, 2005, the Tongi Power Station was brought back online after an overhaul. Prime Minister Khaleda Zia herself inaugurated it.

    Then the power station tripped. Before she could reach Abdullahpur in Uttara. The Prime Minister’s motorcade was still en route from the inauguration when the plant shut down.

    You could not write a better metaphor for the BNP’s entire power sector record.

    What the US Embassy Saw

    Ambassador Moriarty’s 2008 cable didn’t just describe Tarique as corrupt in general terms. It listed specific cases with specific dollar amounts:

    • Siemens: 2% commission on all Siemens deals in Bangladesh, paid in USD, pursued by the FBI and DOJ Asset Forfeiture unit.
    • Harbin Company (Chinese): $750,000 paid to Tarique, transported to Singapore for deposit at Citibank.
    • Monem Construction: $450,000 bribe for government contracts.
    • Al Amin Construction: Owner threatened with closure unless he paid $150,000.

    The cable also documented a $3.1 million bribe (210 million taka) to thwart a murder prosecution, and Tk 20 million stolen from the Zia Orphanage Trust — money meant for parentless children.

    The ambassador’s assessment was unflinching:

    “In short, much of what is wrong in Bangladesh can be blamed on Tarique and his cronies. His flagrant disregard for the rule of law has provided potent ground for terrorists to gain a foothold in Bangladesh.”

    The Aftermath — and the Amnesty

    When the military-backed caretaker government took over in January 2007, Tarique Rahman was arrested. He faced 84 charges — embezzlement, money laundering, orchestrating the August 21 grenade attack. He spent 18 months in prison, where he says he was tortured, suffering spinal injuries that still affect him.

    Then the political winds shifted. Sheikh Hasina returned to power in 2009. The cases against Tarique became tools in the Awami League’s own power games — prosecuted vigorously when convenient, negotiated away when not. In 2013, a trial court acquitted him in the Tk 20.41 crore money laundering case. In 2016, the High Court overturned that acquittal and sentenced him to seven years. In 2024, the Supreme Court stayed the sentence. In March 2025, the Appellate Division acquitted him entirely.

    All 84 cases. Gone.

    The Khamba Tarique scandal was never independently investigated after the caretaker government’s mandate expired. No audit was published. No one went to jail for the phantom poles. The poles themselves — thousands of them — still stand in fields across Bangladesh, slowly crumbling, concrete evidence of a theft that was never prosecuted.

    The Poles Are Still There

    What makes the Khamba scandal different from other corruption cases is its visibility. Most corruption is hidden — money moved through shell companies, deposits in foreign banks, contracts buried in bureaucratic filing cabinets. The Khamba scandal was hiding in plain sight. You could drive through rural Bangladesh and physically count the evidence.

    That’s why the nickname endured. You can erase court records. You can overturn convictions. You can rewrite history books. But you can’t make thousands of concrete poles disappear from the landscape without anyone noticing.

    And people noticed. When Tarique Rahman gave his first interview to Time magazine after returning from 17 years of exile — positioning himself as a reformer, a bridge between Bangladesh’s political aristocracy and its young revolutionaries — the magazine felt compelled to mention Khamba Tarique within the first few paragraphs. His own supporters acknowledge the name. His detractors wield it like a weapon.

    When Tarique told Time that “they have failed to prove anything,” he was technically correct. Every conviction was overturned. Every case was dismissed. But the poles don’t lie. They stand in the ground, mute and patient, waiting for a grid that was promised twenty years ago and never came.

    The farmer in Bogra moved on. He bought a diesel generator. It cost him more than electricity ever would have. It broke down regularly. The fuel was expensive. But at least it worked. Unlike the pole in his field, which still stands there, a monument to what Bangladesh could have been if the money had gone to wires instead of pockets.

    Sources:

  • Voices from Operation Clean Heart: The 44 Who Died in Custody

    Voices from Operation Clean Heart: The 44 Who Died in Custody

    October 16, 2002 — The Operation Begins

    The BNP government called it “Operation Clean Heart.” The name suggested purification — a surgical strike against crime, a restoration of order. What it delivered was 86 days of state-sanctioned terror.

    Over 40,000 security personnel — 24,023 army, 339 navy, plus police, Ansar, and BDR — flooded the streets of Bangladesh. They arrested 11,245 people. They seized 2,028 firearms. And they killed at least 44 people in custody.

    The government’s official position was that 12 people died — all of “heart attacks.”

    “The DMP Commissioner gave shoot-at-sight orders. This is not law enforcement. This is a license to kill.” — Brad Adams, Human Rights Watch

    The Dead: Not Criminals — Citizens

    The 44 named victims of Operation Clean Heart were not the dangerous criminals the government claimed to be hunting. They were farmers and students, a 16-year-old political activist and a 73-year-old man, a rickshaw puller and an assistant film director, businessmen and laborers. They were Awami League supporters and BNP activists alike — the operation targeted political opponents as ruthlessly as it targeted ordinary citizens.

    Shafiqul Islam, age 16 — A Jatiyotabadi Chhatra Dal activist, shot during a protest in Bogra. Sixteen years old. A child, killed by the state for belonging to a political organization.

    Haji Abul Kashem, age 73 — The oldest known victim. Died in Tangail General Hospital. A seventy-three-year-old man, dead after being taken into military custody. The official cause: “heart attack.”

    Nabi Hossain Khan, age 50 — A rickshaw puller in Narsinghdi. Detained by the army. Found dead in a pond. A man who spent his days pulling a rickshaw through the streets, found floating in water after soldiers took him away. His family was told he had drowned. They were not permitted an independent autopsy.

    Rashedul Hasan, age 35 — An assistant film director. Detained on November 7. Dead shortly after. A man who told stories for a living, silenced forever in military custody.

    These are not statistics. These are names. These are people with families who waited for them to come home and received bodies instead.

    The Pattern: Detain, Kill, Call It Natural Causes

    The cause of death in virtually every case was listed as “heart attack,” “cardiac arrest,” or “natural causes.” This was not a medical finding. It was a political cover story — one so transparent that even the government’s own supporters privately acknowledged it was fiction.

    The World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) documented the pattern in urgent interventions:

    “There is a risk of impunity. The deaths in custody must be independently investigated, and those responsible must be held accountable.”

    The OMCT was ignored. Human Rights Watch was ignored. The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed “concern over the indemnity ordinance” — and was ignored. The BNP government had no intention of investigating itself.

    Political Targeting: The Operation’s Real Purpose

    Operation Clean Heart was never primarily about crime. The evidence for its political nature is overwhelming:

    Awami League leader Saber Hossain Chowdhury was detained during the operation. Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim, a cousin of Sheikh Hasina, was detained. The army raided the Awami League office and seized documents — not weapons, not contraband, documents.

    DMP Commissioner Ashraful Huda issued shoot-at-sight orders in Dhaka. Not “arrest on sight.” Not “use necessary force.” Shoot at sight. This was a battlefield directive issued against the civilian population of a democracy.

    Brad Adams of Human Rights Watch condemned the orders directly. The BNP government’s response was to extend the operation.

    The Indemnity Act: Legalizing Murder

    On January 9, 2003 — the same day Operation Clean Heart officially ended — the BNP government passed the Joint Drive Indemnity Ordinance. On February 24, 2003, it was approved in parliament.

    The law granted complete immunity from prosecution to all security personnel who participated in the operation. The language was sweeping: immunity from prosecution for “any casualty, damage to life and property, violation” during the operation.

    This was not an oversight. This was not bureaucratic caution. This was the BNP government looking at 44 dead citizens and deciding that the appropriate response was to make it illegal to hold anyone accountable for their deaths.

    “The indemnity ordinance is an affront to the rule of law. It tells security forces they can kill with impunity, and it tells victims’ families that justice is not available to them.” — Sultana Kamal, prominent human rights activist

    Justice Shamsuddin Chowdhury Manik criticized both the operation and the indemnity ordinance in the strongest terms. His criticism, like all others, was disregarded.

    Justice, Delayed but Not Denied

    It took nine years for the legal challenge to begin. On June 14, 2012, lawyer Z.I. Khan Panna filed a petition against the ordinance. On July 29, 2012, the High Court asked the government to explain why it should not declare the ordinance illegal and order Tk 1 billion in compensation to victims’ families.

    On November 2015, the High Court declared the indemnity ordinance illegal and scrapped it. The verdict was delivered by Justice Moyeenul Islam Chowdhury and Justice Ashraful Kamal.

    The court confirmed what everyone already knew: a government cannot legalize murder. A parliament cannot vote away the right to life. The Indemnity Act was a legal fiction from the beginning — a shield built to protect killers from the consequences of their actions.

    But the court victory was incomplete. The 44 people who died in custody are still dead. Their families received no meaningful compensation. No individual has been held criminally responsible for a single one of the 44 deaths. The indemnity ordinance is gone, but the impunity it was designed to protect remains intact.

    From Operation Clean Heart to RAB

    Operation Clean Heart ended in January 2003. The Indemnity Act was passed the same day. And then, in 2004, the BNP government created the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) — a permanent, institutionalized version of the same logic.

    RAB was formed from the same security forces that carried out Operation Clean Heart. It employed the same tactics: extrajudicial killing, arbitrary detention, torture in custody. The only difference was that RAB didn’t need an indemnity law — it operated with de facto impunity from the start.

    Under BNP rule (2004-2006), RAB killed at least 680 people. The “crossfire” killings became so routine that Bangla acquired a new euphemism: “crossfire-e mrito” — killed in crossfire — meaning murdered by the state.

    Operation Clean Heart was not an aberration. It was a prototype. The BNP government tested whether Bangladesh would accept state-sponsored murder. When the answer was yes — when the Indemnity Act passed, when no one was prosecuted, when the international community issued condemnations and moved on — they created a permanent killing machine.

    The Names We Must Not Forget

    This article names four of the 44 victims. The full list of named individuals is documented by the World Organisation Against Torture, Human Rights Watch, and Bangladeshi human rights organizations. Every name on that list represents a person who was alive before BNP’s soldiers took them into custody and dead after.

    The BNP government called them “heart attacks.” The courts later called the Indemnity Act illegal. History will call them what they were: murders, committed by the state, protected by the government, and erased from accountability by a law that should never have existed.

    “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

    Bangladesh is living that repetition. The same party that created Operation Clean Heart, passed the Indemnity Act, and birthed RAB is now back in power. The same institutions that failed to hold anyone accountable for 44 deaths are now dismantling the few convictions that were achieved.

    The 44 did not die of heart attacks. They died because a government decided that their lives were expendable. The least we can do is remember their names.

    Sources

  • FBI in Dhaka: When America Investigated Bangladesh’s “Dark Prince”

    FBI in Dhaka: When America Investigated Bangladesh’s “Dark Prince”

    November 3, 2008 — A Confidential Cable From the US Embassy

    Ambassador James F. Moriarty sat in the US Embassy in Dhaka and typed a cable to the Secretary of State in Washington. The subject line was clinical: “VISAS DONKEY CORRUPTION 212(F) (RAHMAN, TARIQUE).” The content was devastating.

    Moriarty was requesting that the United States ban Tarique Rahman — son of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, then-acting chairman of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party — from entering the United States under Presidential Proclamation 7750, which allows the president to deny entry to foreign officials involved in “egregious political corruption.”

    The cable, classified CONFIDENTIAL, would not become public for years. When it did — released by WikiLeaks — it confirmed what Bangladeshis had whispered for a decade: the United States government itself considered Tarique Rahman a kleptocrat whose corruption had stunted an entire nation’s growth.

    “Symbol of Kleptocratic Government and Violent Politics”

    The Ambassador’s language was unambiguous. Not diplomatic hedging. Not carefully hedged diplomatic parlance. Direct, specific, and damning:

    “Tarique Rahman, the notorious and widely feared son of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia.”

    “Notorious for flagrantly and frequently demanding bribes in connection with government procurement actions and appointments to political office.”

    “Tarique is a symbol of kleptocratic government and violent politics in Bangladesh.”

    “Tarique reportedly has accumulated hundreds of millions of dollars in illicit wealth.”

    This was not an opposition politician making accusations. This was the United States Ambassador to Bangladesh — a senior representative of Bangladesh’s largest diplomatic partner — writing to the Secretary of State with the full authority of the US government behind his assessment.

    The Specific Cases: How Tarique Made His Millions

    The cable did not deal in generalities. It named names, companies, and dollar amounts — the kind of specificity that only comes from intelligence sources, FBI cooperation, and documented financial trails.

    1. Siemens Bribery: Tarique received approximately 2% commission on ALL Siemens deals in Bangladesh, paid in US dollars. The US Department of Justice’s Asset Forfeiture unit and the FBI pursued this case — meaning American law enforcement was actively investigating the son of a former prime minister of Bangladesh for international bribery.

    2. Harbin Company (China): The Chinese firm paid $750,000 to Tarique. The money was transported to Singapore for deposit into a Citibank account. This was not a domestic kickback — this was international money laundering through the global banking system, involving a Chinese company, a Bangladeshi politician’s son, and an American bank.

    3. Monem Construction: Paid $450,000 in bribes to Tarique for government contracts. Another international company, another six-figure payment, another procurement process corrupted at the source.

    4. The Kabir Murder Cover-Up: Tarique accepted 210 million taka (approximately $3.1 million) to thwart the prosecution of a murder case. Sanvir Sobhan, son of the Bashundara Group chairman, was accused of killing Humayun Kabir. Tarique took the money and used his political power to obstruct justice — turning a murder investigation into a transaction.

    5. Zia Orphanage Trust: Tarique looted 20 million taka from an orphanage fund. Money meant for the care of parentless children was diverted to land purchases and BNP election campaigns. The orphanage trust case would later become one of the few corruption cases that resulted in an actual conviction — before the Great Acquittal erased it.

    6. Al Amin Construction: Tarique threatened the company’s owner with closure unless paid $150,000. This was not subtle influence — this was outright extortion, using the power of the state as a weapon against private business.

    The Economic Cost: 2% GDP Growth Lost Every Year

    The cable contained a number that should haunt every Bangladeshi:

    “Corruption has lowered Bangladesh’s growth rate by two percent per year.”

    Two percent per year. Over BNP’s five-year rule (2001–2006), that compounds to approximately 10% of GDP that Bangladesh never earned. Roads never built. Schools never opened. Hospitals never equipped. Lives never saved.

    This was not an abstract statistic. It was a measurable body count — the children who died of preventable diseases because health budgets were looted, the farmers who couldn’t get their crops to market because infrastructure funds were stolen, the businesses that never started because the cost of doing business included a bribe to Hawa Bhaban.

    Why the US Acted

    Ambassador Moriarty’s recommendation was not a symbolic gesture. Presidential Proclamation 7750, signed by President George W. Bush in 2004, specifically targets foreign officials whose corruption has “serious adverse effects” on the United States — including the theft of US-funded assistance, the facilitation of terrorist operations, and the undermining of democratic institutions.

    The cable made the case on all three grounds. Tarique’s corruption had diverted US-funded development assistance. His facilitation of extrajudicial killings through RAB and his links to the HuJI network that carried out the August 21 grenade attack demonstrated that his corruption had created “potent ground for terrorists to gain a foothold in Bangladesh.” And his systematic destruction of independent institutions — the judiciary, the press, the electoral commission — had undermined the democratic process itself.

    The Ambassador’s final assessment was blunt:

    “In short, much of what is wrong in Bangladesh can be blamed on Tarique and his cronies.”

    “His flagrant disregard for the rule of law has provided potent ground for terrorists to gain a foothold in Bangladesh.”

    The Visa Ban That Followed

    The US eventually acted on Moriarty’s recommendation. Tarique Rahman was banned from entering the United States — a ban that remains in effect as of 2026. He has not set foot on American soil since.

    The visa ban was not a trivial diplomatic gesture. It meant that the acting chairman of Bangladesh’s largest political party — a man who aspires to lead the country — is officially classified by the US government as too corrupt to be allowed through an American airport. It means that every time BNP raises Tarique as its future prime ministerial candidate, they are raising a man that America’s own diplomatic and law enforcement apparatus has documented as a kleptocrat.

    The BNP Response: Deny, Delay, Attack

    BNP’s response to the WikiLeaks cable followed the party’s standard playbook: deny the facts, attack the source, and wait for the news cycle to move on.

    Senior BNP leaders claimed the cable was “fabricated” or “taken out of context.” They pointed out that WikiLeaks releases were unauthorized and therefore unreliable. They demanded “proof” beyond the Ambassador’s own words — as if a CONFIDENTIAL diplomatic cable from the US Ambassador to the Secretary of State, backed by FBI investigations, were somehow less credible than a BNP press release.

    The denial strategy worked domestically, where BNP’s media allies buried the story. Internationally, however, the cable’s impact was permanent. Every subsequent US-Bangladesh diplomatic discussion about governance, corruption, and rule of law would be shadowed by the Ambassador’s assessment.

    Why This Cable Matters Now

    The 08DHAKA1143 cable is not a historical artifact. It is a living document with direct relevance to Bangladesh’s current political situation.

    Tarique Rahman — the same man the US Ambassador described as a “symbol of kleptocratic government” — now effectively runs BNP from exile in London. He is the party’s acting chairman and its prime ministerial candidate. The corruption documented in the cable — the Siemens bribes, the Harbin money laundering, the murder-for-hire, the orphanage looting — has never been addressed through the Bangladeshi justice system. Every conviction was overturned. Every case was dismissed or reversed.

    The US government’s assessment stands uncorrected and unchallenged by any court. The FBI investigation, the DOJ Asset Forfeiture case, the Citibank money trail in Singapore — all of this remains in the international record.

    When BNP tells the Bangladeshi people that Tarique Rahman is a reformer, a new-generation leader, a victim of political persecution — remember that the US Ambassador to Bangladesh, writing in a classified cable to the Secretary of State, described him as “notorious and widely feared,” a man who “flagrantly and frequently demanded bribes,” and a “symbol of kleptocratic government.”

    That is not an opposition attack ad. That is the United States of America’s own diplomatic assessment.

    Sources

    • WikiLeaks Cable 08DHAKA1143: US Embassy Dhaka to Secretary of State, November 3, 2008 — “VISAS DONKEY CORRUPTION 212(F) (RAHMAN, TARIQUE)”
    • Presidential Proclamation 7750: Suspension of Entry as Immigrants or Nonimmigrants of Persons Engaged in or Benefiting from Corruption (2004)
    • Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index (2001–2005): Bangladesh ranked #1 most corrupt
    • US Department of Justice: Siemens AG Foreign Corrupt Practices Act settlement (2008)
    • Wikipedia: Tarique Rahman
  • Crime Scene Washed With Detergent: How BNP Destroyed the Evidence of Bangladesh’s Deadliest Grenade Attack

    Crime Scene Washed With Detergent: How BNP Destroyed the Evidence of Bangladesh’s Deadliest Grenade Attack

    August 21, 2004 — 5:22 PM

    Thirteen military-grade Arges grenades rained down on a crowded political rally on Bangabandhu Avenue in Dhaka. Within minutes, 24 people were dead and over 500 injured. The target — Sheikh Hasina, leader of the Awami League and leader of the opposition — survived with permanent ear damage.

    What happened in the hours after the attack was not a botched investigation. It was a deliberate, systematic destruction of evidence, orchestrated from the highest levels of the BNP government.

    Step One: Attack the Survivors

    As the grenades exploded and bodies fell, police on duty at the rally did not pursue the attackers. They did not secure the crime scene. They did not call for medical assistance.

    Instead, they fired tear gas shells into the crowd of survivors and charged batons at Awami League members who were trying to rescue the injured.

    Let that settle. The police — the state force present at the scene — attacked the people trying to save lives rather than pursue the people who had just taken them.

    This was not incompetence. This was the first phase of the cover-up: disorient the witnesses, scatter the survivors, create chaos that would make it impossible to reconstruct what happened.

    Step Two: Wash the Crime Scene

    Within hours of the attack, the entire crime scene on Bangabandhu Avenue was hosed down with water and detergent. Blood, shrapnel, grenade fragments, forensic evidence — all of it washed into the drains.

    In any functional criminal justice system, a grenade attack on a political rally would trigger the most meticulous forensic investigation possible. Every fragment would be catalogued. Every blood stain would be photographed. Every trajectory would be mapped. The crime scene would be sealed for weeks.

    In BNP-ruled Bangladesh, the crime scene was washed before the bodies were cold.

    The detergent was not incidental. Water alone removes surface blood. Detergent breaks down biological evidence at the molecular level — DNA, skin cells, hair follicles, anything that could later link perpetrators to the scene. This was not cleaning. This was evidence destruction executed with forensic awareness.

    Step Three: Destroy the Weapons

    Four Arges grenades were recovered from the scene — intact, unexploded, capable of yielding fingerprints, residue analysis, and serial number tracing. In a real investigation, these would be the most valuable pieces of evidence. Military grenades have serial numbers. They can be traced to manufacturing batches, shipment records, and ultimately to the arsenals they were stolen from.

    The BNP government had the grenades destroyed.

    Not preserved. Not sent to a forensic laboratory. Not examined by international ballistics experts. Destroyed. The physical evidence that could have identified the supply chain of weapons used to kill 24 people was eliminated on government orders.

    In the 2018 verdict, Judge Shahed Nuruddin of Speedy Trial Tribunal-1 would write:

    “The specialised deadly Arges grenades that are used in wars were blasted at the Awami League’s central office on 23 Bangabandhu Avenue in broad daylight with the help of the then state machinery.”

    The destruction of the recovered grenades was part of that state machinery’s work — ensuring that “help” could never be forensically proven.

    Step Four: Refuse to Register the Case

    The Awami League attempted to file criminal cases immediately after the attack. Bangladesh Police refused to register any First Information Report (FIR). Instead, they registered only a general diary — an administrative notation with no investigative weight.

    This was not a bureaucratic oversight. Refusing to register an FIR is a deliberate legal maneuver. Without a registered case, there is no formal investigation. Without a formal investigation, there are no charges. Without charges, there are no arrests. The refusal to register the case was Step Four in the cover-up: make the attack legally invisible.

    Step Five: Withhold the Bodies

    The BNP government initially refused to hand over the bodies of the victims to their families. The reason was strategic: independent autopsies could reveal the type of grenades used, the blast patterns, and other forensic details that would contradict the official narrative being constructed. By controlling the bodies, the government controlled the evidence.

    Families were eventually allowed to bury their dead, but only after the state had controlled the post-mortem process.

    The “Joj Mia” Fabrication

    With the crime scene washed, the weapons destroyed, and the case file empty, the BNP government needed a story. They needed someone to blame — someone who was not a cabinet minister, not a DGFI director, not the State Minister for Home Affairs.

    They found Joj Mia.

    Joj Mia — real name Jamal Ahmed — was a petty criminal from Noakhali District. He had no connection to the attack, no knowledge of the plot, and no relationship with any militant group. But he was expendable, and he was available.

    On June 10, 2005, CID officials arrested Joj Mia from his home. Sixteen days later, under torture by security forces, he was coerced into giving a false confession under Section 164 to a magistrate. The confession implicated the “Seven Star Group,” a criminal organization, in the attack. The CID’s fabricated narrative claimed Joj Mia and 14 members of this group had planned and executed the grenade attack.

    Another victim — Shaibal Saha Partha — was also arrested and tortured into giving a false confessional statement. He was eventually released, but he continues to suffer from post-traumatic stress from the torture he endured in state custody.

    The Joj Mia fabrication was not a botched investigation that happened to catch the wrong man. It was a deliberate frame-up, designed to close the case with a convenient scapegoat while the real perpetrators — the same pattern used in the Shamsunnahar Hall raid — remained in power.

    The One-Man Commission: Justice Joynal Abedin

    To complete the illusion of accountability, the BNP government appointed a one-man judicial commission headed by Justice Joynal Abedin. The commission’s report blamed the attack on “foreign and local enemies” — a phrase so vague it could mean anything and implicate no one in the government.

    Two years later, Justice Joynal Abedin was elevated to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court. The Daily Star described him as a “shame” for the judiciary. The elevation looked less like a career milestone and more like a reward for services rendered.

    This was the same playbook used after the Shamsunnahar Hall raid, where Justice Tafazzul Islam’s one-man commission blamed low-level officials and protected the Home Minister. BNP had refined the technique: commission → whitewash → promotion.

    Two Years of Nothing

    For two full years after the attack — from August 2004 to the end of BNP rule in October 2006 — the CID failed to submit any charge sheet. BNP leaders repeatedly told the press that the investigation was “about to be completed.” It never was.

    This was not a cold case growing stale. This was an active cover-up. The Home Minister who ordered the crime scene washed — Lutfozzaman Babar — was the same minister responsible for the investigation. The fox was not guarding the henhouse. The fox was burning the henhouse down and hosing away the ashes.

    The Truth Emerges After 1/11

    When the caretaker government took power in January 2007, the investigation was reopened. The results were devastating for the official narrative:

    July 2007: The CID initiated a fresh investigation under the new government.

    November 2007: Mufti Abdul Hannan, chief of HuJI, who had been arrested by the BNP government in 2005 but deliberately NOT linked to the August 21 case, confessed. He revealed the attack was carried out by HuJI with support from Maulana Tajuddin — brother of BNP Deputy Minister Abdus Salam Pintu. Pintu had personal knowledge of the attack.

    2008: Lead CID investigator Mohammad Javed Patwary concluded the attack was aimed at killing Sheikh Hasina, guided by the common grievance of both Mufti Hannan and Abdus Salam Pintu.

    2011: Mufti Hannan gave another confessional statement implicating Tarique Rahman, Lutfozzaman Babar, Harris Chowdhury, Abdus Salam Pintu, and senior officials of the Home Ministry, Police, DGFI, NSI, and the Prime Minister’s Office.

    October 10, 2018: Speedy Trial Tribunal-1 sentenced 19 people to death, including Babar, Pintu, and the former heads of DGFI and NSI. Tarique Rahman, who had fled to London, was tried in absentia and sentenced to death.

    The Pattern of Evidence Destruction

    The washing of the Bangabandhu Avenue crime scene was not an isolated act. It was part of a systematic pattern of evidence destruction under BNP rule:

    The Grenade Attack (2004): Crime scene washed with detergent. Recovered grenades destroyed. Case refused. Bodies withheld. Scapegoat fabricated. Commission whitewashed.

    The Chittagong Arms Haul (2004): Ten truckloads of military weapons seized. Investigation stalled for years. Political connections never pursued. The same Babar who oversaw the grenade cover-up facilitated the arms haul cover-up.

    The Shamsunnahar Hall Raid (2002): No forensic investigation of police assault on 200 women. Babar’s role buried. VC scapegoated. Commission produced a report that never mentioned the Home Minister.

    In every case, the same formula: destroy the evidence, fabricate a scapegoat, appoint a compliant commission, and wait for the story to fade.

    Why Detergent Matters

    The use of detergent to wash the crime scene is the detail that reveals the most. Water cleans. Detergent destroys. The person who ordered that scene washed knew that biological evidence — DNA from the attackers, skin cells on grenade pins, hair from the rooftop positions — could survive water but not detergent.

    This was not a panicked official ordering a cleanup. This was a forensically informed decision to eliminate specific categories of evidence. It suggests that whoever ordered the washing understood exactly what the investigation would look for — and exactly how to make sure it was never found.

    In the 2018 verdict, the court found that the attack was carried out “with the help of the then state machinery.” The detergent was part of that machinery. The destroyed grenades were part of that machinery. The refusal to register the case was part of that machinery. The Joj Mia fabrication was part of that machinery.

    Every act of evidence destruction was an act of complicity. And every act of complicity led back to the same place: the cabinet of the BNP government.

    Sources

    • Wikipedia: 2004 Dhaka grenade attack
    • The Daily Star: Coverage of August 21 grenade attack investigation (2004-2018)
    • Speedy Trial Tribunal-1, Judge Shahed Nuruddin, October 10, 2018 verdict
    • Confessional statements of Mufti Abdul Hannan (November 2007, 2011)
    • Wikipedia: Lutfozzaman Babar — death sentence for grenade attack
    • Dhaka Tribune coverage of Joj Mia fabrication and investigative failures
  • The Shamsunnahar Hall Raid: Babar Ordered It, Anwarullah Took the Fall

    The Shamsunnahar Hall Raid: Babar Ordered It, Anwarullah Took the Fall

    Midnight, July 23, 2002

    The gate of Shamsunnahar Hall cracked open under police batons at half past midnight. Inside, 500 women slept in their dormitory rooms at the University of Dhaka. Within minutes, over 200 of them would be beaten, dragged from their beds, and left bruised on the floor — by the very state apparatus sworn to protect them.

    Officers of the Dhaka Metropolitan Police, acting under explicit orders from the Home Ministry, broke through the main gate and flooded the corridors. They were not alone. Cadres of Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal — BNP’s student wing, the same group whose illegal occupation of the dormitory had triggered the students’ protest — moved alongside the police, pointing out rooms, identifying protesters, and joining the assault.

    Female students were pulled from their beds by their hair. Some were kicked. Others were slapped and verbally abused with language that witnesses later described as unprintable. Students who tried to flee were cornered. Those who locked their doors had them broken down.

    By morning, more than 200 students required medical treatment. The dormitory, a place of safety and learning, had been turned into a crime scene.

    Why the Police Were There

    The students of Shamsunnahar Hall had been protesting for days. JCD activists had illegally occupied portions of the women’s dormitory — a recurring pattern under BNP rule, where the party’s student wing treated university campuses as conquered territory. The students demanded the occupation end. The university administration, headed by Vice-Chancellor Dr. Anwarullah Chowdhury, had been negotiating with the protesters to resolve the standoff peacefully.

    Then the Home Ministry intervened.

    Lutfozzaman Babar, State Minister for Home Affairs, instructed police to enter the dormitory. As the cabinet minister with direct authority over Bangladesh Police, Babar’s instruction was not a suggestion — it was an order. The police chain of command answered to him. The officers who broke down the gate that night were executing his directive.

    This fact — that Babar ordered the raid — was never part of the official narrative. It was buried, deliberately, beneath layers of manufactured accountability.

    The Scapegoat: Dr. Anwarullah Chowdhury

    Within a week of the raid, Vice-Chancellor Dr. Anwarullah Chowdhury was forced to resign. Proctor Nazrul Islam followed. The message from the Prime Minister’s office was blunt: someone had to take responsibility, and it was not going to be the minister who gave the order.

    Dr. Chowdhury’s ouster was not a consequence of negligence. It was a calculated sacrifice — a political maneuver designed to shield Lutfozzaman Babar and, by extension, the Khaleda Zia government from the consequences of ordering a midnight assault on women in their beds.

    Prime Minister Khaleda Zia personally directed the strategy. The VC would absorb the blame. The Home Minister would remain untouched. The police officers who carried out the raid would be quietly reassigned. And the JCD cadres who participated in the beating would face no consequences at all.

    This was not accountability. This was damage control executed at the highest level.

    The One-Man Commission: Justice Tafazzul Islam’s Theater

    To complete the cover-up, Khaleda Zia appointed a one-man judicial commission headed by Justice M. Tafazzul Islam. The commission’s mandate was carefully constructed: it would investigate the raid, but its scope was designed to examine the actions of university officials and police on the ground — not the political authority that ordered the operation.

    The commission did what it was designed to do. It blamed Additional Deputy Commissioner Abdur Rahim of Bangladesh Police and pointed to failures by university administration. The officer who led the raid, Kohinoor Mian, was later made OSD (Officer on Special Duty) — a bureaucratic purgatory that sounded like punishment but carried no actual consequences.

    Justice Tafazzul Islam’s report never mentioned Babar. It never examined who instructed the police to enter the dormitory. It never questioned why the Home Ministry overrode the university’s ongoing negotiations. The commission was not an investigation — it was a stage prop, designed to produce the appearance of accountability while protecting the real perpetrators.

    The Babar Pattern: From Dormitory Raid to Grenade Massacre

    The Shamsunnahar Hall raid was not an isolated incident. It was the opening chapter in Lutfozzaman Babar’s career of state-sponsored violence — a career that would escalate from beating women in dormitories to facilitating the murder of 24 people at a political rally.

    Two years after the Shamsunnahar raid, on August 21, 2004, grenades tore through an Awami League rally on Bangabandhu Avenue in Dhaka. Twenty-four people were killed, including Ivy Rahman, the women’s affairs secretary of the Awami League. Over 300 were injured. The victims were ordinary citizens, political workers, and journalists.

    The investigation into the grenade attack followed the same script as the Shamsunnahar cover-up. BNP manufactured a scapegoat — a petty criminal named “Joj Mia” who was paraded on national television as the mastermind. The real perpetrators — HUJI-B operatives who carried out the attack with the facilitation of the Home Ministry — were shielded for years.

    In October 2018, a court sentenced Lutfozzaman Babar to death for his role in the grenade attack. According to the confessions of HUJI leader Mufti Abdul Hannan, Babar provided the government and security apparatus backing that made the attack possible. He assured the militants of full administrative protection. The same man who ordered police into a women’s dormitory in 2002 was, by 2004, facilitating a terrorist attack on the political opposition.

    Babar also played a central role in the creation of RAB, the elite anti-crime unit responsible for over 600 extrajudicial killings during BNP rule. He facilitated the cover-up of the Chittagong arms haul — the largest weapons seizure in Bangladesh’s history. And during the 1/11 emergency in 2007, he was arrested for illegal firearms possession.

    The pattern is unmistakable: Babar operated with total impunity because he was executing the political will of the Khaleda Zia government. Every atrocity had a built-in escape hatch — a scapegoat, a sham commission, a manufactured narrative.

    The Proxy Playbook: How BNP Manufactured Scapegoats

    The Shamsunnahar Hall raid revealed the template that BNP would reuse across every major scandal of its 2001–2006 rule:

    The Formula: A state crime occurs under the direct authority of a BNP minister. A lower-level figure is identified to absorb the blame. A commission or investigation is launched with a carefully limited mandate. The political principal is never named. The scapegoat is punished or pressured into resignation. The real perpetrator remains in office. Years pass. Nobody is held accountable.

    The evidence for this pattern is overwhelming:

    The Hall Raid (2002): Babar ordered the raid. VC Anwarullah Chowdhury was forced to resign. The one-man commission blamed police officers and university officials. Babar was never investigated. Twelve years later, the Dhaka Tribune reported that no action had been taken against any accused.

    The Grenade Attack (2004): Babar facilitated HUJI’s operation. A pickpocket named “Joj Mia” was framed as the mastermind. The crime scene was washed with detergent within hours to destroy evidence. The real perpetrators were protected for three years until the caretaker government reopened the case.

    The Arms Haul (2004): Ten truckloads of weapons — 4,930 submachine guns, 27,020 grenades, and 2,000 rocket launchers — were seized in Chittagong. The investigation was deliberately stalled. The political connections to the BNP leadership were never pursued.

    The Corruption Trail: From Khaleda’s Orphanage Trust to Tarique Rahman’s Hawa Bhaban empire, every corruption scandal was handled the same way: deny, delay, blame subordinates, and wait for the news cycle to move on.

    Twelve Years of Nothing

    In July 2014, the Dhaka Tribune published a devastating investigation. Twelve years after the Shamsunnahar Hall raid, not a single person had faced consequences. The officers identified in the commission report had been reassigned, promoted, or quietly retired. The JCD cadres who participated in the assault had graduated into BNP’s political apparatus. The political figures who ordered the raid had moved on to greater crimes.

    The Daily Star reported on the anniversary of the raid that students and teachers continued to call for justice. Their calls went unanswered. The Awami League government, which had been in power since 2009, showed no urgency in pursuing the case — perhaps because the machinery of impunity transcends party lines, and because reopening the Shamsunnahar file would mean confronting uncomfortable questions about the structural protection of political power in Bangladesh.

    Why This Matters Now

    The Shamsunnahar Hall raid is not ancient history. It is the origin story of a system — a system where political violence is ordered from above and blamed on those below. Where commissions are tools of concealment, not revelation. Where scapegoats are manufactured with industrial precision.

    Babar’s trajectory from the hall raid to the grenade attack to the arms haul cover-up is not a coincidence. It is the trajectory of a man who knew he would never be held accountable because the political architecture of BNP rule was designed to protect him. Every time he escalated — from beating students to enabling terrorism — the system worked exactly as intended.

    And Anwarullah Chowdhury? The vice-chancellor who tried to negotiate a peaceful resolution, who opposed the police raid, who was overruled by the Home Ministry — he was the first casualty of the cover-up. Forced to resign, publicly blamed, his reputation destroyed. The man who tried to prevent the violence was punished. The man who ordered it was promoted.

    This is how authoritarianism sustains itself. Not just through the commission of atrocities, but through the careful, deliberate distribution of blame — ensuring that consequences always flow downward, never upward.

    Sources

    • Wikipedia: 2002 Police raid Shamsunnahar Hall — 200 injured, JCD cadres joined the raid
    • Wikipedia: Anwarullah Chowdhury — Resigned August 1, 2002 after the Shamsunnahar assault
    • Wikipedia: Lutfozzaman Babar — State Minister for Home Affairs 2001–2006, death penalty for August 21 grenade attack
    • Dhaka Tribune (July 22, 2014): “No action taken against any accused in 12 years”
    • The Daily Star (July 24, 2008): “Punishment to JCD cadres, other culprits demanded”
    • The Daily Star (July 23, 2009): “Call to punish perpetrators of Shamsunnahar Hall raid”
  • Prothom Alo’s 2,000-Word Article Mentioned the Iskander Family Twice. That’s Not an Accident.

    Prothom Alo’s 2,000-Word Article Mentioned the Iskander Family Twice. That’s Not an Accident.

    Prothom Alo’s 2,000-Word Article Mentioned the Iskander Family Twice. That’s Not an Accident.

    On March 25, 2026, Prothom Alo published a detailed profile of retired Lieutenant General Masud Uddin Chowdhury following his arrest. The article ran over 2,000 words. It covered his role in 1/11, his promotions, his business dealings, his time as High Commissioner to Australia, and the cases now stacked against him.

    The Iskander family — Khaleda Zia’s own blood — was mentioned in two sentences.

    Two sentences. In a 2,000-word article about a political crisis that the Iskander family helped create, funded, and directly benefited from.

    This is not journalism. This is narrative construction. And the construction site is built on a very specific foundation: make one man the villain, and make the family that engineered the crisis invisible.

    What Prothom Alo Actually Wrote About the Iskanders

    Here is the full extent of the Iskander family’s presence in the article:

    “It was widely discussed that Masud Uddin Chowdhury’s brother-in-law, the late Sayeed Iskander, brother of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) chairperson Khaleda Zia, had supported his role. It was also suggested that Iskander had influenced the elevation of Moeen U Ahmed to the position of Army Chief, bypassing several others.”

    That’s it. Sayeed Iskander — Khaleda Zia’s brother, a sitting MP from Feni-1, a man who allegedly helped install the Army Chief and backed the entire 1/11 power shift — gets described as someone who “supported his role” and “influenced” a promotion. Passive language. No agency. No accountability. Just a helpful relative doing a favour.

    Then the article spends the remaining 1,990 words building a prosecution narrative around Masud Uddin Chowdhury alone.

    What Prothom Alo Chose Not to Write

    The article does not mention:

    Shamim Iskander — Khaleda Zia’s younger brother, a former Biman flight engineer with no regular employment from 1991 to 2008, who controlled Biman Bangladesh Airlines as its undeclared operator during BNP rule. The ACC filed a case against him in 2008 for acquiring Tk 1.33 crore beyond known income. His charge sheet had 36 witnesses. He was discharged in March 2025. By March 2026, he was sitting in the VIP gallery at Parliament. From accused to honoured guest in exactly one year.

    The Biman looting — Tk 250 crore in aircraft leases. Tk 40 crore in commissions. Defective aircraft that cost Tk 100 crore over five years while being worth Tk 62 crore on the market. Maintenance kickbacks funnelled through brother-in-law Shamsul Haque, who fled after 1/11 and is currently in London. By 2006, Biman employees nearly lynched Shamim on the tarmac. None of this appears in Prothom Alo’s account of who created the conditions for 1/11.

    Sayeed Iskander’s own political career — He was an MP from Feni-1 during the same BNP government (2001-2006) that oversaw the most corrupt period in Bangladesh’s recorded history. Transparency International ranked Bangladesh the most corrupt country in the world for five consecutive years during this period. The same article that mentions Sayeed’s “support” for Masud omits the political machine he was part of.

    The family’s continued influence — Fasbeer Iskander, Shamim’s son, co-founded The Front Page, a digital media platform with 212,000 Instagram followers and brand sponsorships from Coca-Cola, Nestlé, and Walton. He won a Study UK Alumni Award in 2026. In interviews, he describes founding the platform because of “17 years of no freedom of speech” — a direct echo of BNP’s political narrative. His family connection to BNP’s first family has never been disclosed on the platform, in interviews, or in award citations. None of this appears in Prothom Alo’s article.

    The brother-in-law who fled — Shamsul Haque, Shamim’s brother-in-law, served as the local agent for foreign firms getting Biman contracts. He has been a fugitive since January 2007. He is currently in London. The article does not mention him.

    The Prosecutor’s Quote That Reveals Everything

    The article quotes Public Prosecutor Omar Faruq Faruqi as saying:

    “Under the so-called minus-two formula, there had been efforts to eliminate the Zia family from politics. Ironically, the person he allegedly sought to torture to death is now the Prime Minister.”

    Read that again. The prosecutor — representing the state now run by Tarique Rahman’s BNP — is framing Masud Uddin Chowdhury as someone who “sought to eliminate the Zia family” and “torture to death” the current Prime Minister’s brother.

    This is not a legal argument. This is a political vendetta dressed in courtroom language. And Prothom Alo prints it without context, without counterpoint, and without noting the obvious conflict: the Zia/Iskander family is now the government prosecuting the man they blame for 1/11.

    The Pattern: Create the Crisis, Then Blame the Responders

    Here is what the historical record actually shows:

    Between 2001 and 2006, the BNP government — led by Khaleda Zia, with her brothers Sayeed and Shamim embedded in politics and state enterprise respectively — presided over:

    • The most corrupt period in Bangladesh’s history (Transparency International, five consecutive years)
    • The August 21, 2004 grenade attack that killed 24 people
    • The 10-truck arms haul in Chittagong (4,930 guns, 27,020 grenades)
    • The rise of Bangla Bhai under state protection
    • 63 simultaneous bombings across districts on August 17, 2005
    • The creation of RAB, which has since killed 600+ people in “crossfire”
    • Shamim Iskander’s systematic looting of Biman Airlines
    • Hawa Bhaban — Tarique Rahman’s parallel government running extortion and kickbacks

    By late 2006, the caretaker government system had been destroyed. Fake voters were added to the rolls. The Chief Justice’s retirement age was extended to rig the appointment. The UN and EU pulled out of monitoring. The country was heading toward a sham election that would have cemented one-party rule.

    1/11 did not happen in a vacuum. It happened because the Iskander-Zia political machine broke the state.

    Now that same family is back in power. And they are systematically prosecuting the people who tried to stop them — while erasing their own role in creating the conditions that made 1/11 necessary.

    The ACC Cleared Masud Uddin Chowdhury Three Times

    The article does not mention that DUDAK (the Anti-Corruption Commission’s predecessor) investigated Masud Uddin Chowdhury on three separate occasions during the interim government and cleared him each time. The current charges — 11 cases including murder, attempted murder, and human trafficking — were filed after the BNP returned to power in 2026.

    This is not mentioned in Prothom Alo’s article.

    Who Gets Blamed, Who Gets VIP Seats

    The contrast is the story:

    | Person | Role (2001-2006) | Current Status |
    |——–|——————|—————-|
    | Shamim Iskander | Looted Biman, Tk 40 crore+ commissions, no legitimate employment | ACC case discharged. VIP gallery at Parliament |
    | Sayeed Iskander | MP, backed 1/11 power shift, helped install Army Chief | Deceased — never held accountable |
    | Shamsul Haque | Biman contractor, kickbacks, fugitive | Living freely in London |
    | Fasbeer Iskander | Runs The Front Page, undisclosed BNP family ties | UK award winner, brand sponsorships |
    | Masud Uddin Chowdhury | Coordinated anti-corruption task force during 1/11 | Arrested. 11 cases. 5-day remand. Dirty water thrown at him in court |

    The man who tried to clean up the corruption is in a cell. The men who created it are in Parliament, in London, and running media platforms.

    Why This Matters

    This is not about defending one man. Masud Uddin Chowdhury’s record during 1/11 deserves scrutiny — the detentions, the special facilities, the questions about due process. All of it should be examined.

    But when the scrutiny is selective — when the people who built the corrupt system get two sentences of passive voice, and the people who responded to it get 2,000 words of prosecution narrative — that is not accountability. That is revisionism.

    The Iskander family is not a footnote in the 1/11 story. They are central to it. They helped create the crisis. They helped shape the military response. They looted the state before, during, and after. And now they are using state power to prosecute their political enemies while writing themselves out of the narrative entirely.

    Prothom Alo’s article is a case study in how that revisionism works. Two sentences for the architects. Two thousand words for the responder.

    That ratio is the story.

    Sources

    • Prothom Alo, “Masud Uddin Chowdhury: 1/11, power, reward and controversy,” March 25, 2026
    • The Daily Star, “Shamim rode on Biman,” July 20, 2008
    • The Daily Star, ACC case discharge report, March 25, 2025
    • Dhaka Tribune, Shamim Iskander in VIP gallery at Parliament, March 2026
    • Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, 2001-2006
    • Mohiuddin Ahmad, 1/11: Bangladesh 2007-2008
    • ACC charge sheet records against Shamim Iskander & Kaniz Fatema (2008)
    • The Prestige Magazine, interview with Fasbeer Iskander & Akib Majumder, November 19, 2024
    • Study UK Alumni Awards 2026, Business & Innovation category
    • WikiLeaks Cable 08DHAKA1143 — US Ambassador Moriarty on Tarique Rahman
  • The Great Acquittal: How Every Conviction From Bangladesh’s Darkest Era Was Erased

    The Great Acquittal: How Every Conviction From Bangladesh’s Darkest Era Was Erased

    Eighty-four cases. That is how many were filed against Tarique Rahman between 2007 and 2024 — cases involving money laundering, arms trafficking, murder conspiracy, and corruption on a scale that made US Embassy diplomats in Dhaka use the phrase “symbol of kleptocratic government” in classified cables later published by WikiLeaks.

    As of March 2025, every single one has been acquitted.

    The process was not slow. It was not gradual. It was a single, coordinated legal event — a cascade of acquittals that began within months of the July 2024 uprising and the fall of the Awami League government. Courts that had once sentenced men to death and decades of imprisonment now declared, one after another, that the evidence was insufficient, the trials were flawed, the convictions were unsafe. By September 2025, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh had put its seal on the entire process, dismissing the last remaining petition for retrial in the August 21 grenade attack case.

    The accused did not walk free into obscurity. They walked into power.

    The Charge Sheet: What Was Proven, Then Unproven

    To understand what the Great Acquittal erased, you have to understand what was on the record.

    August 21, 2004: The Grenade Massacre

    On the evening of August 21, 2004, thirteen Arges grenades rained down on a crowd of 20,000 at an Awami League rally on Bangabandhu Avenue in Dhaka. Twenty-four people were killed. More than 500 were injured. Ivy Rahman, the party’s Women’s Affairs Secretary, died three days later from her wounds.

    The trial, which concluded in October 2018 after 14 years, convicted 49 people — including Tarique Rahman, then-senior minister Lutfozzaman Babar, and HuJI-B chief Mufti Abdul Hannan. Several were sentenced to death. Tarique, tried in absentia after fleeing to London, received a life sentence.

    The evidence was extensive. Prosecutors presented intercepted communications, witness testimony from military intelligence officers, and forensic analysis matching the grenades to military stockpiles. The trial court’s 4,000-page verdict detailed how the attack was orchestrated through the Prime Minister’s Office and Hawa Bhaban — Tarique’s unofficial power center.

    On December 1, 2024 — barely four months after the fall of the Awami League — the High Court acquitted all 49 accused. The court found that the trial had been conducted improperly, that witness testimony was unreliable, and that the prosecution had failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

    “The High Court annulled the trial court verdict and acquitted all convicts including Tarique Rahman.” — Attorney General’s Office spokesman, December 2024

    In September 2025, when the Appellate Division dismissed a petition for retrial, the acquittal became final. The 24 Martyrs of August 21: Who They Were, How They Died, and Why the State Tried to Erase Them

    The Chittagong Arms Haul: 4,930 Guns and a Cover-Up

    On the night of April 1, 2004, police and Coast Guard intercepted the loading of ten trucks at the Chittagong Urea Fertilizer Limited jetty on the Karnaphuli River. What they found remains the largest arms seizure in Bangladesh’s history: 4,930 firearms, 27,020 grenades, 840 rocket launchers, 300 rockets, and over 1.1 million rounds of ammunition.

    The weapons were destined for ULFA — the United Liberation Front of Asom — a militant group fighting for Assam’s independence from India. Indian intelligence confirmed the connection. Two witnesses later told the court that the operation was conducted with the knowledge of NSI and DGFI, Bangladesh’s military intelligence agencies, and that government officials had threatened them with death to keep them silent.

    In January 2014, a special court sentenced 14 people to death, including ULFA military chief Paresh Baruah and former minister Lutfozzaman Babar.

    In December 2024, the High Court acquitted Babar and five others. In January 2025, it acquitted them in the parallel Arms Act case as well. Paresh Baruah’s death sentence was reduced to 14 years. The Chittagong Arms Haul: 4,930 Guns, 840 Rocket Launchers, and a State-Sponsored Cover-Up

    Tarique Rahman’s Money Laundering: $2.5 Million Washed Clean

    In June 2007, the Anti-Corruption Commission filed a case against Tarique Rahman and his business partner Giasuddin Al Mamun for laundering Tk 20.41 crore — approximately $2.5 million at the time. The case detailed how Tarique, while serving as the de facto power behind his mother’s government, used his influence to help Mamun acquire and then launder the money through Singapore bank accounts.

    A trial court acquitted Tarique in November 2013. But in July 2016, the High Court overturned that acquittal, sentencing him to seven years’ imprisonment and a fine of Tk 20 crore. The court was direct:

    “Tarique Rahman influenced political power to help his close friend, Giasuddin Mamun, to get and then launder 200 million taka ($2.5m).” — Deputy Attorney General Moniruzzaman Kabir to AFP, July 2016

    That conviction stood for eight years. In December 2024, the Supreme Court stayed the sentence. In March 2025, the Appellate Division acquitted both Tarique and Mamun entirely. “Mr. Ten Percent” — How Tarique Rahman Ran a Parallel Government from Hawa Bhaban (2001-2006)

    Khaleda Zia’s Orphanage Trust: Stealing From Children

    The Zia Orphanage Trust case was among the most damning. The ACC alleged that Khaleda Zia, through the trust named after her late husband, embezzled funds meant for orphans. In February 2018, a special court convicted Khaleda and sentenced her to five years. By October 2018, the High Court had enhanced the sentence to ten years. Tarique, also convicted, received ten years.

    In November 2024, the High Court acquitted Khaleda, declaring the verdict null and void. In January 2025, the Supreme Court acquitted both Khaleda and Tarique in this case and the parallel Zia Charitable Trust case.

    Khaleda Zia died on December 30, 2025, having outlived every conviction against her.

    Shamim Iskander: The Brother Who Bled Biman Airlines

    Khaleda Zia’s younger brother, Shamim Iskander, was a former flight engineer at Biman Bangladesh Airlines who exploited his position as the Prime Minister’s brother to control the airline’s commercial operations. The ACC documented at least Tk 40 crore in commissions from aircraft leases during the BNP tenure, with 36 witnesses lined up to testify.

    In March 2025, a Dhaka court simply discharged Shamim Iskander and his wife from the case. The 36 witnesses never testified. By March 2026, Shamim Iskander was sitting in the VIP gallery at the maiden session of the 13th Parliament.

    The Pattern: How It Happened

    Look at the timeline, and a pattern becomes impossible to ignore.

    July 2024: The Awami League government falls. A caretaker administration takes over. Within weeks, the legal machinery begins to reverse.

    December 2024: The High Court acquits all 49 accused in the August 21 grenade attack case. The same month, it acquits Babar and others in the Chittagong arms haul. The Supreme Court stays Tarique’s money laundering sentence.

    January 2025: The Supreme Court acquits Khaleda and Tarique in the Orphanage Trust and Charitable Trust cases.

    March 2025: Tarique and Mamun acquitted in the money laundering case. Shamim Iskander discharged from the Biman corruption case.

    September 2025: The Supreme Court dismisses the last petition for retrial in the grenade attack case, making the acquittals final.

    February 2026: Tarique Rahman is sworn in as Prime Minister.

    There is no independent judiciary in this sequence. There is a judiciary that responded to a political earthquake by undoing every legal consequence of the previous political era. The cases were not retried with new evidence. They were not subjected to fresh scrutiny. They were reversed — comprehensively, rapidly, and with a uniformity that defies coincidence.

    What International Observers Said

    Human Rights Watch, which documented many of the original crimes under BNP rule, has not issued a formal statement on the acquittals. But their earlier reports provide context that the courts chose to disregard.

    Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index ranked Bangladesh as the most corrupt country on earth for five consecutive years during BNP rule (2001-2005) — a record no other nation has matched. The scores were not marginal: Bangladesh scored 0.4 out of 10 in 2001, a figure so low that TI itself noted the “very different results” across surveys while still confirming the composite finding.

    The International Crisis Group, in its Asia Report No. 121 (October 2006), documented that the BNP-led coalition government “did not target radical Islamist groups” despite religious extremism arising under its watch — the same extremism that culminated in the August 17, 2005 nationwide bombings and the August 21 grenade attack.

    US Embassy cables published by WikiLeaks described Tarique Rahman as a “symbol of kleptocratic government” and the “Dark Prince” of Bangladeshi politics. These were not opposition propaganda. They were the assessments of American diplomats stationed in Dhaka, writing in classified communications they never expected to see published.

    None of this evidence was presented as new argument in the acquittal proceedings. It was simply ignored.

    The Questions Nobody Is Asking

    When every conviction from an era is overturned after a regime change, and when those acquitted then assume power, the question is not whether the original trials were fair. The question is whether the acquittals were.

    The August 21 grenade attack killed 24 people. The victims’ families spent 14 years waiting for justice. They watched 49 people convicted. Then, in a single court session, they watched all 49 walk free. Nobody has explained to them why the evidence that sustained a 4,000-page verdict was suddenly insufficient.

    The Chittagong arms haul put 4,930 military-grade weapons and 27,020 grenades on ten trucks at a government jetty. The connection to Indian insurgents was confirmed by Indian intelligence. The involvement of Bangladesh’s own intelligence agencies was testified to by witnesses who said they were threatened with death. These facts did not change between 2014 and 2024. What changed was the government.

    Tarique Rahman’s money laundering was documented in Singapore court records — not Bangladeshi ones. Singapore’s courts convicted his associate, Giasuddin Al Mamun, in a parallel case. The $2.5 million was real. The bank accounts were real. The paper trail crossed international borders. None of this was disputed in the acquittal. It was simply set aside.

    The Accused Now Run the Country

    There is a word for what has happened in Bangladesh since July 2024, though it is a word that legal scholars prefer to avoid: impunity.

    Not the impunity of a single pardon or a single acquittal. The impunity of a system — a legal system that has demonstrated, in case after case, that political power determines legal outcomes. That convictions are provisional. That justice is temporary. That the courts answer to whoever sits in Bangabhaban.

    The ICT Is Now a BNP Weapon: How a Party Lawyer Became Chief Prosecutor of the Tribunal That Prosecutes BNP’s Enemies The pattern extends beyond acquittals. In the same month that Shamim Iskander was discharged from his corruption case, the BNP government appointed a party lawyer as the new chief prosecutor of the International Crimes Tribunal — the body that had once prosecuted crimes against humanity during the 1971 Liberation War. The tribunal, repurposed, now targets BNP’s political opponents.

    12.1 Million Ghost Voters: How Bangladesh’s Voter Rolls Were Stuffed Before the 2007 Election And before the 2026 election, the same electoral rolls that had been stuffed with 12.1 million fake names before 2007 were quietly reformed — though nobody has been held accountable for the original fraud.

    The $300 million ghost company that channeled oil contracts to shell firms with no website, no experience, and political connections? The investigation has been shelved.

    The man US diplomats called the “Dark Prince” is now the Prime Minister. His mother’s corruption cases are cleared. His brother-in-law sits in Parliament’s VIP gallery. The arms haul conspirators are free. The grenade massacre convicts are free. Every single case — 84 of them — has been wiped clean.

    There is no mechanism in Bangladesh to appeal these acquittals. The Supreme Court has spoken. The legal system considers the matter closed. The victims of August 21, 2004 — the 24 dead, the 500 injured, the families who waited 14 years for accountability — have no further court to approach.

    That is not justice. That is its absence.

    Sources

    • Human Rights Watch, “Bangladesh: Events of 2004-2006,” World Report chapters
    • International Crisis Group, Asia Report No. 121, “Bangladesh Today,” October 2006
    • Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index, 2001-2005
    • US Embassy Cable (Dhaka), “Tarique Rahman: Symbol of Kleptocratic Government,” published by WikiLeaks
    • Bangladesh High Court, August 21 Grenade Attack Case, Acquittal Order, December 2024
    • Bangladesh Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Dismissal of Retrial Petition, September 2025
    • Bangladesh High Court, Chittagong Arms Haul Case, Acquittal Order, December 2024
    • Bangladesh Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Money Laundering Case Acquittal, March 2025
    • Bangladesh High Court, Zia Orphanage Trust Case Acquittal, November 2024
    • Bangladesh Supreme Court, Zia Charitable Trust Case Acquittal, January 2025
    • Dhaka District Court, Shamim Iskander Discharge Order, March 2025
    • Deputy Attorney General Moniruzzaman Kabir, statement to AFP, July 2016
    • Attorney General’s Office spokesman, statement on grenade attack acquittal, December 2024
    • NBC News, coverage of August 21 acquittals, December 2024
    • Dhaka Tribune, “Shamim Iskander in Parliament VIP Gallery,” March 2026
    • The Business Standard, Khaleda Zia case coverage, 2024-2025
  • 12.1 Million Ghost Voters: How Bangladesh’s Voter Rolls Were Stuffed Before the 2007 Election

    12.1 Million Ghost Voters: How Bangladesh’s Voter Rolls Were Stuffed Before the 2007 Election

    Twelve point one million. That is not a typo. That is the number of fraudulent names that an audit found crammed onto Bangladesh’s voter rolls ahead of the 2007 parliamentary election — a figure so staggering it exceeded the entire population of Greece at the time.

    The discovery did not come from a whistleblower or a leak. It came from simple arithmetic. When researchers cross-referenced the voter list with census data, the numbers refused to align. The rolls contained roughly 1.23 crore (12.3 million) more names than there were eligible voters in the country. Ghosts, duplicates, children, the deceased — all of them registered to vote in a system that had no photographs, no biometrics, and no reliable mechanism to verify identity at the polling station.

    The Aziz Commission and the Partisan Voter List

    At the center of this fraud sat Chief Election Commissioner M.A. Aziz, appointed by the BNP-Jamaat alliance government. Aziz oversaw the preparation of the voter list that would be used for the scheduled January 2007 election. Under his supervision, the rolls swelled with millions of phantom entries — names that corresponded to no living, eligible citizen.

    The Awami League and opposition parties raised the alarm repeatedly. Their objections were dismissed. Aziz’s commission showed no interest in investigating the discrepancies. When independent analysts compared the voter rolls against population data, the gap was enormous and unmistakable: 12.1 million names that should not have been there.

    “The BNP-Jamaat alliance government even prepared the voter list with about 1.23 crores (12.3 million) fake voters in order to win the next election.”

    — Awami League Official Documentation

    How the Fraud Worked

    The manipulation was not subtle. It operated across several dimensions simultaneously:

    Ghost voters. Names of people who did not exist, had died, or were below voting age were added to the rolls en masse. In a country with no photo voter ID, there was no way for polling agents to verify whether the person standing before them was actually the registered voter.

    Duplicate entries. The same individual was registered multiple times — under slight variations of their name, under different addresses, or across different constituencies. A single person could theoretically vote in several locations.

    Territorial manipulation. Voters were registered in constituencies where they did not reside, padding the rolls in strategically important districts. This was gerrymandering by registration rather than by boundary.

    The scale of the operation was industrial. 12.1 million fake names represented roughly 10% of the entire voter roll — a margin wide enough to swing any election in a country where contests are frequently decided by single-digit percentages.

    The Constitutional Rig That Accompanied the Fraud

    The fake voters were not an isolated scheme. They were one component of a comprehensive effort to rig the electoral infrastructure from top to bottom.

    In June 2003, the BNP government appointed Justice K.M. Hasan as Chief Justice. In 2004, they amended the constitution to raise the retirement age of Supreme Court justices from 65 to 67 — a change timed precisely so that Hasan would be the last retired Chief Justice when the caretaker government needed to form before the next election. Under Bangladesh’s system, the immediate past Chief Justice automatically becomes Chief Advisor of the caretaker government that oversees elections.

    “In 2004, the BNP deliberately changed the constitution to increase the retirement age of Supreme Court judges from 65 to 67 years.”

    — Dhaka Tribune

    The plan was elegant in its audacity: stuff the voter rolls with millions of fake names, then install a Chief Advisor with known BNP connections to oversee the election conducted on those compromised rolls. The structure of the rig went all the way down to the ballot box itself — opaque containers that made ballot stuffing undetectable.

    The Collapse

    It did not work. The scale of the fraud was too visible, and the opposition’s response was too fierce.

    Justice K.M. Hasan, facing massive street protests and the threat of a boycott, declined the Chief Advisor position on October 27, 2006, citing health reasons. The Logi Boitha movement of October 28 — violent clashes between AL and BNP supporters that killed at least 12 people — made it clear that a Hasan-led caretaker government would not be accepted.

    President Iajuddin Ahmed then assumed the dual role of President and Chief Advisor — an arrangement that placed a BNP-appointed head of state in charge of overseeing an election already compromised by 12 million fake voters. The Awami League saw the writing on the wall.

    January 3, 2007: The Awami League formally withdrew from the election, declaring a boycott over the compromised voter list and partisan arrangements. Without the participation of the major opposition party, the election had no legitimacy.

    Eight days later, on January 11, the military intervened. President Iajuddin declared a state of emergency and resigned as Chief Advisor. The 1/11 caretaker government under Fakhruddin Ahmed took power — and one of its first priorities was the voter roll.

    The Fix: A Photo Voter ID for the First Time

    The discredited Aziz Commission was forced out. In its place, ATM Shamsul Huda was appointed Chief Election Commissioner on February 5, 2007, serving alongside commissioners Muhammad Sohul Hossain and M. Sakhawat Hossain.

    What they built was revolutionary for Bangladesh:

    • A photo-based voter list — national voter ID cards with photographs — created for the first time in the country’s history
    • Transparent ballot boxes replacing the opaque containers that had enabled stuffing
    • Electronic voting machines piloted for the first time
    • Comprehensive biometric data collection
    • Party registration requirements formalizing political accountability

    “Under his leadership, the Election Commission, assisted by the military, prepared a photo-based voter list, initiated dialogues for electoral law reforms, introduced party registration requirements, and piloted the use of electronic voting machines.”

    — bdnews24.com, on ATM Shamsul Huda’s legacy

    The new system was not merely a technical upgrade. It was a structural rebuke to the old one. Every ghost voter on the old rolls became a ghost — unphotographed, unverified, and unable to materialize at a polling station where agents could now check faces against ID cards. The duplicate entries collapsed because biometric registration made it impossible to register twice. The territorial manipulation ended because addresses were now tied to verifiable residence.

    The photo voter ID became the de facto national identity document for all Bangladeshis — a system so fundamental that its origins in a corruption scandal are often forgotten. It eliminated, permanently, the possibility of the type of mass voter fraud attempted under the BNP-Jamaat alliance.

    The Proof: December 2008

    The ultimate vindication came on December 29, 2008. The election held under the new system — with photo voter IDs, transparent ballot boxes, and a reconstituted Election Commission — was recognized domestically and internationally as free and fair.

    “To their credit, the caretakers were eventually able to take a decent way out of power through presiding over — and credit here goes to ATM Shamsul Huda and his team at the Election Commission — a free and fair election in December 2008.”

    — Dhaka Tribune

    The Awami League and Grand Alliance won by a two-thirds majority. The result was accepted by all parties. It remains one of the most credible elections in Bangladesh’s history — precisely because the system that produced it had been rebuilt from the ashes of the 12.1 million phantom voters.

    Why This Matters Now

    The 12.1 million fake voters are not ancient history. They are the reason Bangladesh has a photo voter ID system at all. They are the reason the 2008 election was credible. And they are a case study in what happens when electoral infrastructure is captured by a ruling party — the voter rolls become a weapon, the election commission becomes a tool, and the constitutional framework becomes a mechanism for entrenching power.

    The BNP-Jamaat alliance did not try to win an election. They tried to make winning unnecessary — by stuffing the rolls so thoroughly that the result was predetermined. The 1/11 intervention, for all its controversies, destroyed that infrastructure and replaced it with one that could not be rigged the same way.

    That replacement — the photo voter ID, the transparent ballot boxes, the biometric registration — is the most durable positive legacy of the 1/11 period. It was built because 12.1 million ghosts demanded it.

    Read more about Bangladesh’s electoral crisis and the 1/11 intervention: