Politics of Public Suffering: Who Will Break the Cycle?

By Jahid Ikbal : After a long period in exile, the return of BNP’s Acting Chairman Tarique Rahman is approaching. This is undoubtedly a major political event in Bangladesh. It is natural that supporters will feel emotional, excited, and eager to welcome the leader of a major political party. Large preparations and public gatherings are therefore expected.

However, when such political activities begin to choke daily life and create severe public suffering, an old and important question returns: does our politics still value show of strength more than citizens’ rights?

The ongoing preparation of a massive rally on the 300 Feet Road in Khilkhet has caused serious concern among conscious citizens. The 300 Feet Road is not just any road; it is a key artery connecting Uttara with Purbachal and the greater Sylhet region. Around it are critical facilities such as Evercare Hospital, Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport, and several densely populated residential areas. Blocking or severely restricting such a road for a political program does not only create traffic jams—it disrupts emergency healthcare, economic activities, and normal urban life.

This raises a simple but important question: was there no alternative? Could such a gathering not be held at the International Convention City Bashundhara (ICCB), a stadium, or a large open field, instead of occupying a vital road?

Unfortunately, the culture of proving political strength by occupying roads is deeply rooted in Bangladesh’s political history. Since independence, both ruling parties and opposition forces have repeatedly used public inconvenience as a tool of political expression. But when an ambulance carrying a critically ill patient is stuck in traffic for hours, when an examinee fails to reach the exam center on time, or when a daily wage worker loses a day’s income—can this politics still claim moral legitimacy?

Politics that claims to speak in the name of the people becomes questionable when it turns everyday life into misery. At that point, calling it “people-friendly politics” becomes difficult.
In this context, Bangladesh can learn from neighboring India. Despite being the world’s largest democracy, India has drawn a clearer line between political activity and civic life. Cities like Delhi and Kolkata have designated venues such as Ramlila Maidan or Brigade Parade Ground for large political gatherings. Courts and election authorities strictly ensure that no major roads or emergency routes are blocked in the name of politics. Large rallies and VIP movements still take place, but they do not completely paralyze ordinary life.

Sadly, even after 54 years of independence, Bangladesh still lacks a disciplined political culture and properly designated venues for mass political programs.

The security measures surrounding December 25, and restrictions on public access to the airport area from the evening of December 24, may be justified in the name of security. Yet, in reality, they create an atmosphere of abnormality. If a single political event forces the state into such a defensive posture, it reflects not political maturity, but rather administrative and structural weakness. We often hear promises to move away from VIP culture—but where is the reflection of that promise in practice?

The student–public uprising of August 5 inspired hopes for a “New Bangladesh”—a Bangladesh based on equality, dignity, and restored citizens’ rights. People sacrificed and protested in the hope of a more humane and responsible state system. But if the same old politics of road occupation and public suffering continues even after such a movement, public frustration will only deepen.
The politics of a New Bangladesh should be planned and disciplined. There can be rallies, but not at the cost of sidewalks and main roads. There can be public meetings, but not by bringing daily life to a halt. Patriotism cannot remain limited to slogans and banners. True patriotism means empathy for the people’s suffering.

Political parties must understand that while large crowds may create short-term impact, long-term trust and respect can only be earned by sharing the people’s pain, not adding to it. Blocking the 300 Feet Road or airport routes and creating chaos can never be an example of people-friendly politics.

In conclusion, Bangladesh must break free from this toxic cycle of public suffering. If political parties have even minimal respect for citizens’ rights, they should voluntarily avoid busy public roads and choose alternative venues for their programs.

We want a Bangladesh where political flags fly in the sky of public comfort, where slogans do not drown out the cries of ordinary people. Political rights must exist—but they should never take away the people’s fundamental right to move freely and live with dignity.

The time has come to bury outdated political behavior and practice a modern, disciplined, and truly people-oriented politics.

Author: Senior Journalist and President, Bangladesh Online Journalists Association