Recent clashes in the Shahbag-Intercontinental area have brought us back to the old question: Is Bangladesh slipping back into the politics of agitation before the elections?
The murder of Shaheed Sharif Osman Bin Hadi is undoubtedly tragic. His family is still seeking answers—what happened and why. Their demand for justice is natural. The citizenry will seek an impartial investigation—this is also natural. But the question remains, will this demand follow a path that destabilises the state, elections, and political stability anew?
In the current situation, two different narratives have emerged. The government is saying no shots were fired. The protesters claim there was excessive use of force. The only way to bridge this gap is through a swift, transparent, and credible investigation. The clearer the investigation results, the less the doubt. As doubts decrease, so does agitation. If justice is delayed or remains unclear, rumours spread. When rumours spread, controlling the situation becomes difficult.
One important aspect of Hadi's life was his desire to participate in mainstream discussions. Over time, his language and stance evolved. This reality reminds us of the potential for change in individuals. Hadi's death saddens us. However, turning his name into a slogan for conflict does not honour him. True honour lies in uncovering the truth, ensuring justice, and guiding society towards a more responsible path.
A major issue in our political culture is the quick transformation of the deceased into symbols, while there is little effort to understand them in their lifetime. The politics of dead bodies is easy; justice, truth-finding, and institutional reform are hard. Without tackling these challenging tasks, society repeatedly returns to the same place—anger, conflict, and uncertainty.
In recent discussions, a point has emerged. Some claim a ''third party'' is trying to heat up the situation to question the elections. Behind this statement lies both emotion and political reality. Blaming without evidence is not responsible behaviour. However, political theory teaches us that during sensitive times, especially pre-election periods, various interest groups may see ''strategic moments''.
In political sociology, there is a concept of ''political opportunity structure''. Notable proponents include Peter Eisinger, Sidney Tarrow, David S. Meyer, and Doug McAdam. According to them, when the political environment is uncertain, some groups seek opportunities to strengthen their position. Elections are such a time, when state attention, media focus, and public opinion are all active. Consequently, tension or instability quickly gains significant political meaning.
Similarly, political communication experts Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw state in their ''agenda-setting'' theory that issues at the centre of public discussion become politically important. If an incident remains at the center of agitation for a long time, it accumulates the power to influence elections. Therefore, sometimes emotions are heightened around a tragic event to create a broader political impact.
This analysis is not to accuse anyone but to remind us—politics has no void. Where emotions are intense, strategy is active. In this reality, the greatest caution is ensuring Shahid Hadi's name does not become an instrument of gaining power for any party. The judicial process should remain outside of political calculations. When death is turned into a strategic asset, truth is overshadowed.
Society is generally more sensitive before elections—this is not just a matter of experience but also of political psychology. Elections mean a mix of competition, expectations, fears, and emotions. During this time, people become more entrenched in their group identities. In political psychology, this is called ''group polarisation'', meaning when people stay among like-minded individuals, their positions become more rigid. As a result, small incidents can trigger significant reactions.
Additionally, there is uncertainty before elections. Who will win? What changes will come? This uncertainty makes people more cautious and sometimes more anxious. Social theory suggests rumours spread rapidly in times of uncertainty because people want to fill gaps with incomplete information.
In the digital age, this process is even faster. A snippet of a video, an incomplete statement, or an emotional post can reach thousands in moments. Even if corrections come later, the emotional impact of initial reactions remains. In communication theory, this is known as the ''first impression effect''; the first information has a greater impact on people's minds. For this reason, the pre-election period is both politically and mentally fraught with tension.
The state's major responsibility during this time is to maintain trust. Transparency is not just a beautiful word; it is the foundation of trust. Informing about the progress of investigations regularly reduces rumuors. Providing a timeline allows people to wait. Clear communication mitigates tension. These are not weaknesses but signs of responsible governance.
Political parties also have responsibilities. There is always the temptation to exploit tensions with elections approaching. But long-term instability resulting from short-term gains benefits no one. Once violence escalates, it becomes difficult to control. It harms the public, the state, and ultimately all political parties.
In our political culture, there is often a tendency to completely dismiss opponents. But democracy survives on coexistence. There will be differences of opinion and criticism—this is normal. But when violence or inhuman language enters, democracy becomes weak. If Hadi's memory teaches us anything, it's that when avenues for dialogue are closed, avenues for conflict open.
The younger generation reacts quickly and organises rapidly—this is their strength. However, misinformation or provocative language can easily lead them astray. Therefore, political leaders, educators, media, and civil society all have the responsibility to create an environment of fact-based and restrained discussion for the youth.
The media also plays an important role. Provocative headlines or incomplete information can complicate situations. On the other hand, clear information, context, and explanations bring stability among people. Maintaining this balance is now most crucial.
The current situation can go in three directions. One, if the investigation is swift and transparent, tension will decrease and the election process will be strengthened. Two, delay or lack of clarity in the investigation may increase doubt and division. Three, if clashes increase, questions may arise about the election itself. We desire the first path because it strengthens stability, trust, and democracy.
Can we not aspire for a Bangladesh where justice prevails, but the fire of revenge does not burn? Can we not aspire for a Bangladesh where the name of the martyr is spoken with honour, but not as a slogan for conflict? Ultimately, we have to pose this question to ourselves.
We pronounce Shahid Hadi's name with respect. May his memory make us responsible, not divided. Let there be elections, but without the shadow of instability. The path of democracy is long, but it is a path of patience and restraint. History has warned us many times. Will we take that warning seriously this time?
#Mohammad Jalal Uddin Shikder is a teacher and researcher, Department of Political and Social Science, North South University.
* The views expressed are the author''s own.
#This article, originally published in Prothom Alo print and online editions, has been rewritten in English by Rabiul Islam