Why did a shooting situation arise in Gopalganj?

Even if all 63 districts of Bangladesh become devoid of the Awami League, there is still ample reason to believe that the party will continue to exist—and remain in a strong position—in Gopalganj, the birthplace of Bangabandhu and the location of his mausoleum. That is why Gopalganj is referred to as the "fortress" of the Awami League. The violence that erupted in that fortress or stronghold centring the programme of the National Citizen Party (NCP) has raised several questions. Some are even calculating who gained or lost from this incident. However, regardless of who may have benefited politically, no one suffered more loss than the parents, relatives, and friends of those who were killed. And those who lost their lives are now beyond all worldly gains and losses.

As part of the "July March to Build the Nation" which began on July 1, the NCP announced the "March to Gopalganj" programme for Wednesday, July 16. While the programme was called "July Padajatra" in other districts, the fact that they named it "March to Gopalganj" or "Operation Gopalganj" in this case is a major question. There is no doubt that through this naming, they deliberately singled out Gopalganj.

At 11:15pm, the night before the programme, NCP convenor Nahid Islam posted on his verified Facebook account: "Tomorrow, July 16, March to Gopalganj." That afternoon, NCP’s northern regional chief coordinator Sarjis Alam posted on Facebook: "July 16, March to Gopalganj!" Later that night, he posted again: "Comrades of the revolution, rush like a comet. We’ll meet tomorrow at 11am in Gopalganj town, Inshallah." On the day of the incident, at around 12:30pm, senior NCP leader Arifur Rahman Tuhin posted on Facebook: "March or Bulldozer."

The question is, why "March or Bulldozer"? What were they indicating they would demolish with a bulldozer—that was clear to many. After the bulldozing of Bangabandhu’s house at Dhanmondi-32, there is sufficient reason to think that the NCP was possibly referring to demolishing Bangabandhu’s mausoleum in Gopalganj. If that was indeed the implication, then it is natural for not only local Awami League leaders, activists, and supporters but also ordinary citizens to be outraged. The question is, why did the NCP bring up the issue of a bulldozer? Was someone forcing them to adopt such a hardline stance or provoking them to rename the programme from "July Padajatra" to "March to Gopalganj"?

Whatever the explanation may be, it is not surprising that when the youths that led the July uprising—which resulted in the fall of the Awami League—decide to hold a programme in Gopalganj, the birthplace of Bangabandhu and Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League's stronghold, clashes or counter-attacks would occur. NCP leaders were also aware that their programme in Gopalganj would not be like those in other parts of the country. It cannot be said that they were not concerned about possible attacks or major conflict. Yet why did they proceed with the programme there? To test their strength? Relying on receiving maximum support from the police and army?

Was it to examine the Awami League’s position in Gopalganj, given that the party is cornered nationwide after August 5? Or to break the myth that Gopalganj is the Awami League's fortress? And how important was it to break that myth? After all, it is not unusual for a party to have a stronghold in a particular district. For example, Bogura is considered a BNP stronghold, Rangpur a stronghold of the Jatiya Party. A district becoming a party stronghold happens for various reasons; it’s not always a bad thing. But if someone wants to challenge that stronghold, it is only rational and desirable to win public support through better politics, not conflict and violence. Therefore, if the NCP had called their Gopalganj programme "July Padajatra" like in other districts and not brought up the bulldozer reference—if local Awami League members had not got the impression that they were going to demolish Bangabandhu’s mausoleum (a threat that had been voiced ever since the demolition of the house at 32)—then perhaps the situation would not have turned so violent.

However, that does not justify or legitimise the attack and vandalism at the NCP rally. Rather, if the NCP had been able to hold their assembly in Gopalganj peacefully despite any provocation, it would have demonstrated a gesture of tolerance from the Gopalganj Awami League. Unfortunately, the country’s politics is no longer in a place of such tolerance and mutual respect.

According to media reports, four people were killed in the violence in Gopalganj. Many more were injured. The question is, why did a situation arise there that led to shooting, and who shot them?

In the police report on Gopalganj’s law and order situation the following day, Thursday, the incident was described as follows: "The army and police tried to calm the unruly crowd. But they did not listen and started throwing stones and bricks, and attacked the police, army, and NCP leaders and activists with indigenous weapons. Additionally, the saboteurs attacked the Gopalganj district jail and other government facilities. During the clash, four people were killed. About 45 people, including police officers and journalists, were reportedly injured."

The police report did not mention that they were killed by gunshots. However, this was confirmed by doctors. According to media reports, three people were brought to the hospital dead on Wednesday afternoon. They had gunshot wounds. Nine others were brought to the hospital with gunshot injuries. (Prothom Alo, July 17, 2025).

Inspector General of Police Baharul Alam claimed that the police did not use lethal weapons to control the situation in Gopalganj. In his words: the police tried to handle the situation with patience. No lethal weapons were used. That’s why it took some time to bring the situation under control. (Khabar-er Kagoj, July 17, 2025).

The question is, if they weren’t shot by the police, then who shot them? A heart-wrenching image from the incident is also circulating on social media: a boot pressing down on a man’s chest, an unconscious young man being thrown into a police vehicle—these scenes can never be acceptable in any way. Wasn’t it against such scenes that the July 2024 uprising occurred? Then why are we seeing such cruelty again? What message will these videos send abroad about Bangladesh? It is crucial that a proper investigation reveals the truth behind the incident so that such scenes are never witnessed again in the future.

Amin Al Rashid: Journalist and writer