When Democracy is pushed into exile

As elections draw near, it is becoming clear that although Bangladesh will vote, the democracy it ushers in may be a farce. After the elections were announced and the date of 12 February 2026 fixed, the caretaker government led by Mohammed Yunus has been overstepping its mandate and taking decisions that are an outright attack on democracy and would make the election a mere eyewash. Its decision to ban the Awami League, one of the top parties in the country, would render the entire exercise redundant. Bangladesh’s next general elections are officially scheduled for 12 February 2026. This election will be the first after former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s ouster in 2024. Sheikh Hasina remains in exile, but her party was preparing to participate in the elections. The elections were promised by the caretaker government led by Mohammed Yunus as a means to restore true democracy in the country. Former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s stark description of democracy being “in exile” in a “blood-soaked landscape” may be dismissed by her critics as rhetoric from an ousted leader, but the broader implications of excluding a major political force from the electoral process cannot be justified. Sheikh Hasina was criticised for promoting her party at the cost of the opposition, and the narrative of her partisan politics was sold to the people.

Now, the same people are doing just that. If the Awami League is a spent force, as it is made out to be, let it participate in the elections and lose; that would give another layer of legitimacy to the new government.

Bangladesh’s interim administration, led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, had promised stability, reform and a credible transition. By banning the Awami League, Yunus and his associates have overstepped their mandate. They were entrusted to oversee the elections, not to set the rules for them. An election without opposition participation will only be a sham. It will lack moral and political legitimacy. Hasina’s warning of a “legitimacy crisis” is therefore not without substance. Even on the count of stability, Yunus has failed miserably. Attacks on minorities are rampant, some reported and some not. Suppression of dissent and a pervasive atmosphere of fear are pushing Bangladesh into dark ages. Bangladesh has also strained its relations with India. For decades, despite periodic tensions, India-Bangladesh relations rested on shared security interests, economic interdependence and regional stability. Snapping ties with New Delhi will only add to its problems.

It is also a challenge for New Delhi to craft a calibrated response. It cannot be a mute spectator to a crisis unfolding in the neighbourhood that would spill over. It must engage with Dhaka and try diplomatic back channels to ease the situation, as refugee flows, cross-border crime, radicalisation and economic disruption will directly affect India’s national interests. Bangladesh stands at a crossroads. Excluding the Awami League may offer short-term political control, but it risks accelerating a cycle of instability and self-destruction.