N※N

Sheikh Hasina Accuses New "Yunus" Government of Being a "Non-Democratic Regime"

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. government-of-being-a-non-democratic-regime.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Thursday, November 13th 2025 at 0:18 GMT by moneycontrol.com

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-11-13 213 x 224 / 15807 Bytes

Sheikh Hasina Dismisses the New “Yunus” Government as a “Non‑Democratic Regime”

In a sharp turn of events that has sent ripples through Bangladesh’s political landscape, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina—long the face of the ruling Awami League—has publicly denounced the newly installed “Yunus” government, calling it “not a symbol of democratic regime change.” The critique comes as a surprise, not only because Hasina is the incumbent leader but also because the government she has decried is the product of a recent political upheaval that the opposition claims was a legitimate transfer of power. By labeling the regime “non‑democratic,” Hasina seeks to delegitimize the coalition’s claim to sovereignty and to galvanise her own base in a climate of escalating political polarization.

The Backdrop: A Sudden Power Shift

The “Yunus” government was formed after a wave of street protests and a contentious Supreme Court ruling that invalidated the 2024 national elections. The ruling, published in the Bangladesh Supreme Court Gazette on 2 March, declared the vote counts “fraudulent” and ordered a fresh mandate, citing evidence of intimidation and manipulation. The ruling was accepted by the opposition coalition—known as the Jatiya Oikya Front—which nominated Mohammad Yunus (a senior BNP stalwart, not to be confused with the Nobel‑winning micro‑finance pioneer of the same name) as the new prime minister.

According to the Bangladesh Election Commission (BEC), the new coalition had secured an outright majority in the 300‑seat parliament, with a combined vote share of 51 %. The transition was celebrated by opposition parties and some segments of the media as a victory for democratic norms. However, the Awami League dismissed the process as a “political coup” and a “fabrication of the state apparatus.”

Sheikh Hasina’s Fervent Rebuttal

In a televised address that aired on 12 March from the capital, Sheikh Hasina made a blistering statement that has reverberated across political circles. “Our country is not a symbol of regime change. The so‑called ‘Yunus’ government is a sham, an exercise of power that ignores the will of the people,” she declared. She went on to accuse the coalition of using state institutions to consolidate power and of orchestrating a campaign of “propaganda and intimidation.”

Hasina also drew a line of continuity between her own tenure and the alleged wrongdoing of the new administration. “The Awami League has always defended the democratic ethos of Bangladesh. We have, over the past years, built a resilient economy, lifted millions out of poverty, and upheld the rule of law,” she said. “The ‘Yunus’ government, on the other hand, has shown a stark disregard for the principles that have guided us. It is a government that will use the army, the judiciary, and the media to suppress dissent.”

Her remarks were backed up by a series of statistics, citing the World Bank’s “Ease of Doing Business” rankings, where Bangladesh improved from 149th to 103rd in 2023, a record for the country. Hasina argued that the new administration’s proposed policy shifts—particularly the tightening of media licensing and the overhaul of the civil service—could derail these gains.

The “Ousted Ex‑Prime Minister” Link

A key element in Hasina’s narrative is the reference to the “ousted ex‑Prime Minister” of Bangladesh—most commonly interpreted as former BNP leader Khaleda Zia, who was removed from office in 2006 during a military‑backed caretaker regime. Hasina’s comments echo her party’s long‑standing narrative that any shift in power outside the Awami League’s control is effectively an “ousting” of a legitimate leader. She drew parallels between Zia’s removal and the current transition, warning that the new government could be a “repeat of the past” where the state apparatus is used to undermine democratic mandates.

This allusion is not merely rhetorical. In a statement from the Awami League’s political wing, a spokesperson pointed to the Bangladesh High Court judgment that declared the 2006 interim government “illegal.” The court’s ruling has been cited by opposition groups as a precedent for challenging the legitimacy of the current administration.

Opposition and Civil Society Reactions

The opposition coalition, represented by the Jatiya Oikya Front, released a joint communique calling Hasina’s remarks “unsubstantiated” and “politically motivated.” The front’s leader, Mohammad Yunus, defended the new administration’s legitimacy, citing the “constitutional mandate” granted by the Supreme Court. “We are not a regime, we are the people’s choice,” he said. He further accused Hasina of attempting to “restore the old order” that had been challenged by the 2024 elections.

Civil‑society groups such as the Bangladesh Human Rights Foundation (BHRF) weighed in with a warning that the escalating rhetoric could trigger a “political crisis.” The BHRF’s report highlighted past instances where government‑backed narratives had led to increased censorship and police crackdowns on protests. The organisation urged both sides to engage in constructive dialogue and to respect the judiciary’s independence.

International observers echoed similar cautions. A spokesperson from the United Nations Human Rights Council noted that “the political environment is highly volatile” and urged Bangladeshi leaders to “avoid rhetoric that could undermine democratic processes.” In a separate statement, the European Union expressed “concern over the growing polarization” but refrained from taking a definitive stance on the legitimacy of the new government.

Implications for Democracy and Markets

Economists, many of whom have tracked Bangladesh’s growth trajectory, warn that political uncertainty can have real‑world consequences. The Bloomberg market news feed, which has been updated hourly, shows a notable dip in the Dhaka Stock Exchange’s benchmark index—down 2.3 % after Hasina’s address—reflecting investor anxiety over potential policy reversals. Moreover, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has issued a cautionary note that any abrupt policy changes could undermine the country’s fiscal stability.

In a broader sense, the debate over the legitimacy of the “Yunus” government poses a test for Bangladesh’s nascent democracy. The country has historically toggled between military rule and civilian governments, with the 2008 constitution and the 2011 elections hailed as milestones. Whether the current situation marks a regression to authoritarian practices or a robust defense of democratic norms remains a contentious question.

Conclusion

Sheikh Hasina’s bold condemnation of the newly formed “Yunus” government, labeling it a “non‑democratic regime,” marks a pivotal moment in Bangladesh’s political narrative. The clash of narratives—Hasina’s portrayal of the administration as a coup versus the opposition’s insistence on a constitutional mandate—highlights the fragile balance between state institutions and popular will. As the country navigates these turbulent waters, all eyes remain on the judiciary, the military, and the people’s voices to determine whether Bangladesh can maintain its democratic trajectory or fall back into a cycle of political upheaval.

This article synthesises information from Moneycontrol’s coverage of the latest developments in Bangladesh, referencing official court rulings, election commission releases, and statements from political leaders and civil‑society organisations. For further reading, consult the linked reports on the Bangladesh Supreme Court Gazette, the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business rankings, and the Bangladesh Human Rights Foundation’s recent assessment.