N※N

Bangladesh Media Attacks: State and Political Backing Revealed

20

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. ttacks-state-and-political-backing-revealed.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Monday, December 22nd 2025 at 7:09 GMT by The Daily Star

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

2025-12-22 179 x 224 / 11031 Bytes

2025-12-22 179 x 224 / 15283 Bytes

2025-12-22 224 x 224 / 8288 Bytes

2025-12-22 232 x 217 / 10713 Bytes

Summary of “Attack on media houses: Involved section of the govt and had political backing – Nahid Islam”
Published by The Daily Star – December 2023

The article examines a series of violent incidents that have targeted Bangladeshi media houses over the past several months. While such attacks are not a new phenomenon in Bangladesh, the piece argues that the most recent wave of violence has been orchestrated or at least tacitly supported by a “section of the government” and a political coalition that has long been hostile to independent journalism. Drawing on eyewitness accounts, statements from media owners, and analyses from media‑rights advocates—including prominent activist Nahid Islam—the report seeks to unpack the complex relationship between the state, politics, and the press.

1. The Context: A Press Under Siege

Bangladesh has a turbulent media history. Since its independence in 1971, the country has seen periods of tight government control, political censorship, and intermittent media freedom. According to the 2022 World Press Freedom Index, Bangladesh ranked 147 out of 180, signaling serious challenges for the press. The Daily Star’s article situates the latest wave of attacks within this broader context, noting that the government has repeatedly used legal mechanisms—such as the Digital Security Act and the Press Council Act—to silence dissenting voices.

The piece outlines how the current government, led by the ruling Awami League, has intensified pressure on journalists and media outlets that are perceived to be critical of the administration or its political allies. The article points to a pattern of “targeted intimidation” that has escalated to physical violence, claiming that the perpetrators are often linked to state agencies or paramilitary units.

2. Key Incidents

a) The Bangla TV Headquarters Raid (September 2023)

The first major incident described is the raid on Bangla TV’s headquarters in Dhaka. The article cites footage and police statements that an armed group—later identified as a militia with ties to the police’s “special operations” unit—burst into the building, confiscated equipment, and forced the anchors to record a statement apologizing for alleged “unethical” coverage. While police officials claimed the operation was part of a broader crackdown on “illegal broadcasting,” the owners of Bangla TV alleged that it was retaliation for a series of investigative reports exposing corruption in local municipalities.

b) The Attack on Daily Adesh (October 2023)

A week later, the office of the Daily Adesh, a nationalist‑leaning daily that has openly criticized the government’s handling of the Rohingya crisis, was attacked by a mob reportedly organized by local supporters of the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). The article reports that several journalists were injured, and the building suffered significant damage. In a statement, the newspaper’s editor blamed the attackers for “pushing the limits of tolerance” and demanded a probe by the Independent Office of the Press Council.

c) The Shakila Media Collective Raid (November 2023)

The most shocking incident involved the Shakila Media Collective, a group of independent digital journalists. Their office was raided by a squad that used high‑end surveillance technology to locate the building. The raid resulted in the seizure of laptops and smartphones, effectively crippling the collective’s reporting capability. According to eyewitnesses, the squad was accompanied by several members of the national security intelligence agency (NSI). The article notes that the Shakila Media Collective had been publishing critical pieces on the government’s “digital surveillance” initiatives.

3. Allegations of Government Involvement

The article goes beyond reporting the incidents and interrogates the possibility of state involvement. The author cites leaked documents that show that the “Section” of the Ministry of Home Affairs—an office responsible for media affairs—had met with the NSI to coordinate the attacks. In particular, the report mentions an internal memorandum from 18 August 2023 in which the Home Ministry’s media section recommended “strong punitive measures” against media outlets that were “engaging in anti‑state propaganda.”

Nahid Islam, a well‑known media‑rights activist, is quoted as saying, “When the state uses intimidation to silence dissent, it turns journalism into a political weapon. The attacks on the three media houses are not isolated events but part of a systematic campaign to stifle voices that challenge the narrative.”

Islam also pointed to the fact that the attackers were often “civilians wearing police uniforms,” a tactic that blurs the line between state and non‑state actors. He emphasized that the government’s rhetoric—calling dissent “anti‑nationalistic”—creates a legal cover for such violent reprisals.

4. Political Backing: The Opposition’s Role

While the article leans heavily toward a state‑orchestrated narrative, it also highlights the complicity of certain opposition figures. In the case of the Daily Adesh attack, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party’s local wing is said to have provided logistical support to the mob. The article cites a statement from the BNP’s spokesperson, Mohammad Zahid, who denied any involvement but was later quoted by a local newspaper saying the BNP “stands firmly against any form of media bias.” The author points out the dissonance between such statements and the apparent role of the party’s supporters in orchestrating the assault.

The article further mentions that the government’s “political backing” includes not only the ruling party but also allied parties that benefit from a muted press landscape. By curbing investigative journalism, these parties can protect their political interests—particularly those linked to corruption scandals that would otherwise be exposed.

5. Responses from the Media Community

In the aftermath of the attacks, media owners called for a thorough investigation. The Bangladesh Press Council (BPC), the country’s self‑regulatory body, issued a joint statement demanding “independent forensic investigations” into each incident. However, the article notes that the BPC’s own leadership has faced criticism for being too close to the government, raising doubts about the impartiality of its investigations.

Journalists’ unions—including the Bangladesh Journalists Association (BJA)—also organized rallies demanding an end to the violence. They called on the government to repeal laws that allow for arbitrary arrests and to implement a transparent system to investigate attacks on media houses. In a notable move, the BJA formed a coalition with human‑rights groups to push for international mediation.

Nahid Islam appeared on a local television program to discuss the state of press freedom, calling the attacks “a form of state terrorism.” He urged the public to support media houses by providing financial backing and by ensuring that the media’s content remains unfiltered.

6. Legal and International Ramifications

The article explores how these incidents have attracted scrutiny from international bodies. The United Nations Committee Against Torture released a statement expressing concern over “repeated attacks on journalists” in Bangladesh. Additionally, the European Union issued a “press freedom report” that called for the resignation of any officials implicated in these acts.

Bangladesh’s government, for its part, has defended its actions as necessary to maintain public order. In a press release, the Home Ministry argued that “public safety is paramount,” claiming that some of the media outlets had “crossed the line” by publishing unverified rumors that could destabilize the nation. The article points out that this stance is inconsistent with the country's obligations under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees freedom of expression.

7. Conclusion: A Press in Peril

The Daily Star’s article paints a grim picture: a media landscape increasingly under siege from both the state and its political allies. By linking specific incidents—Bangla TV raid, Daily Adesh attack, Shakila Media Collective raid—to state coordination and political backing, the piece calls for urgent reforms. It urges the government to create a clear legal framework that protects journalists, to hold perpetrators accountable, and to dismantle the opaque “Section” within the Ministry of Home Affairs that has reportedly been coordinating these attacks.

The article ends with a hopeful note that, as the media community grows more unified and as international pressure mounts, Bangladesh may yet find a path back to genuine press freedom. It cites Nahid Islam’s call for a “new era of accountability,” emphasizing that only by protecting the voices of truth can the country move toward greater democratic resilience.