Fascist Rehabilitation Masquerades in the name of Administrative Efficacy

The government pledged to build a “meritocratic Bangladesh” in public administration, promising a state apparatus free from political influence, highly skilled, and accountable. However, seven to eight months into its tenure, questions have surfaced regarding the pace and nature of transformation, particularly at the senior secretary level. A substantial number of officials who held key positions under the previous Awami League government remain in pivotal roles, including contractual appointments. Concurrently, many civil servants deprived of promotions and postings for years have yet to receive expected placements. This has prompted debate within the civil service over whether changes are merely reshuffles or indicative of genuine structural reform.

Critiques within the administration highlight that progress in overhauling the bureaucracy remains slow. Following the interim government’s tenure, reports indicate that several key ministerial secretary positions and field administration roles are still held by officials favored under the previous regime, creating bottlenecks in carrying out development initiatives. Some officials are actively lobbying for contractual appointments, including in the Finance Division and the Financial Institutions Division, while the Secretary of the Bridges Division has already secured a contractual post. In contrast, several officials aligned with the BNP have been made Officers on Special Duty (OSD) or posted outside the Secretariat. Despite these concerns, leadership in the Ministry of Public Administration has yet to provide clear answers regarding the selection process for these appointments. Although the BNP’s election manifesto committed to merit-based appointments, an Administrative Reform Commission, a restructured Public Service Commission, and redress for officials unjustly dismissed or forced into retirement during the past 15 years, the re-evaluation of deprived officers remains sluggish, fueling discontent.

Meanwhile, BNP Acting Secretary General and Political Advisor to the Prime Minister, Advocate Ruhul Kabir Rizvi, stated that associates of the ousted regime are actively attempting to destabilize the country and trouble the elected administration. He emphasized that Prime Minister Tarique Rahman’s government is a people’s government that will tolerate neither crime nor anarchy.

State Minister for Public Administration Abdul Bari told Inqilab that removing officers solely because they held significant positions under the prior regime is not government policy, nor are postings granted strictly on political identity. He stated that appointments and promotions are governed by transparency, integrity, experience, and competence, as the Prime Minister directed that administration should not be politicized. However, he noted that allegations regarding specific compromised officials would be reviewed.

The Bangladesh Administrative Service Association (BASA), the central forum for BCS administration cadre officials tasked with implementing executive policy, has voiced concerns that the grievances of long-deprived officers remain unaddressed. While some affected officials from the past 15 years of the Awami League government and the subsequent 18-month interim regime have been elevated to secretary-level ranks, many continue to seek redress from ministers, advisers, and senior officials.

Unresolved Injustices of 15 Years

Following the Awami League’s rise to power in 2009, widespread reshuffling sidelined numerous officers associated with the preceding BNP government, subjecting them to OSD status or denied promotions, while politically favored officials advanced rapidly. This created a lasting divide between “deprived” and “beneficiary” factions within the civil service. Although the interim government instituted retrospective promotions following the July–August 2024 uprising, many officers feel they were not reinstated to substantive responsibilities, leaving historical grievances unresolved.

Deprived Officials Still Waiting

Officers within the bureaucracy report that several qualified, senior personnel overlooked under the previous regime remain sidelined, while only a small faction has secured meaningful portfolios. Public administration experts emphasize that this presents a core governance test: appointments should neither be awarded merely for party affiliation nor denied simply for serving under an earlier administration. Former Secretary and public administration expert Anwar Faruk noted that true administrative reform requires breaking away from a culture of political allegiance. Replacing one political camp with another changes faces rather than administrative character; instead, assessments should focus on integrity, professional competence, decision-making, and documented performance.

Retaining Past Officials: Pragmatism vs. Accountability

A critical question facing the administration is evaluating officials who served closely with the previous political leadership. Experts caution against treating policy execution itself as wrongdoing. The relevant distinctions are whether an officer crossed administrative boundaries into partisan activism, engaged in corruption, or compromised professional duties. Failing to make these distinctions risks turning administrative reform into political retaliation.

Risks of Screening for ‘Clandestine Politics’

Recent political statements regarding covert anti-government activity inside the bureaucracy have triggered internal unease. Government circles are monitoring whether hidden actors are obstructing policy implementation or creating instability, cross-checking past postings and affiliations. However, experts warn that relying heavily on political screening threatens the professional integrity of the civil service.

Sluggish Progress in Key Ministries

Crucial divisions driving state policy—including Finance, Public Administration, Cabinet Division, Home Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Planning, and Local Government, still perceived as lacking necessary operational momentum. Extended delays in filling key vacancies, such as the Secretary to the Prime Minister’s Office, or burdening individuals with multiple portfolios, have slowed decision-making.

Is Reform Limited to Postings and Transfers?

Administrative experts and senior officials underscore that structural reform cannot be reduced to shuffling secretaries. Establishing verified criteria for merit-based promotions, curbing political patronage, curbing corruption, and ensuring institutional accountability remain the core benchmarks needed to rebuild public confidence in state machinery.