Bangladesh Political Turmoil: Osman Hadi murder mystery

Once again, Bangladesh has witnessed the eruption of violent protests, reflecting the country’s continuing political instability. Previously, large-scale demonstrations were led by student groups opposing the administration of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. In the current phase of unrest, attention has centred on Osman Hadi, a prominent leader of the earlier student movement that mobilized widespread opposition to Hasina’s government in August 2024. Following those events, an interim administration headed by Nobel Laureate Muhammad Yunus announced that the next general elections would be held on 12 February 2026. Osman Hadi, a young leader of the political platform Inqilab Manche, was shot and later died from his injuries, an event that triggered nationwide unrest. Thousands of protesters took to the streets in Dhaka and other major cities across Bangladesh. This development has raised several critical questions: Who was Osman Hadi? Who may have been responsible for his assassination? And why were the operations of the Indian High Commission subsequently suspended?

Osman Hadi emerged as a key leader of the student movement that played a significant role in the political uprising against Sheikh Hasina’s administration. Following the success of that movement, student-led political groups gained considerable popularity. After the announcement of the general election date, Hadi declared his intention to contest the elections and formally launched his campaign in Bijoynagar, located in central Dhaka. On 12 December 2025, while returning from a mosque, Hadi was shot by two motorcycle-borne assailants in central Dhaka. After the attack, Hadi was initially transported abroad to Singapore for advanced medical treatment. Despite medical intervention, he succumbed to his injuries after six days. News of his death sparked massive protests across the country. The National Citizen Party led demonstrations, alleging that the attackers along with some associates had fled to India. Protesters demanded the suspension of the Indian High Commission, claiming that those responsible for the assassination had escaped across the border.

As unrest escalated, violent demonstrations erupted in multiple locations. Mobs chanting anti-Indian slogans marched toward the Indian High Commission, calling for its closure. Indian visa application centres in Dhaka, Rajshahi, and Chittagong were attacked with stones, while the Indira Gandhi Cultural Centre was vandalized. The violence was not limited to Indian establishments. Bangladesh’s leading newspaper, Prothom Alo, was forced to suspend both its print and online operations after its office in Dhaka’s Karwan Bazar area was set on fire on the night of 18 December. Similarly, the office of The Daily Star in the Farmgate area of Dhaka was ransacked by protesters.

These events raise a critical analytical question: who stands to benefit from Osman Hadi’s murder? As a leading figure in the uprising against Sheikh Hasina and her party, Hadi had clear political adversaries. One interpretation suggests that supporters of Sheikh Hasina or elements linked to her former ruling party may have been involved. Another perspective implicates India, given Hadi’s strong anti-Indian rhetoric and the historically close relationship between Sheikh Hasina and the Indian government. These factors have contributed to public suspicion that India may have played a role, particularly since Sheikh Hasina reportedly fled to India following her resignation after the August 2024 uprising.

Preliminary investigations by Bangladeshi authorities have alleged that the suspects, including individuals reportedly connected to the ousted and banned Awami League, crossed into India immediately after the attack. However, it is important to note that these claims remain speculative and are based on circumstantial evidence rather than confirmed findings. The intensity of anti-Indian sentiment among Bangladeshi protesters warrants further examination. Hadi was a vocal critic of what he described as Indian hegemony in Bangladesh’s political affairs. Only hours before the attack, he posted a controversial and distorted map of India on social media. In this post, Punjab, Ladakh, and Jammu and Kashmir were depicted as separate from India and shown as part of Pakistan, while large portions of eastern and northern India, along with Myanmar’s Rakhine State, were portrayed as part of a proposed “Greater Bangladesh.” The timing of this post, in close proximity to the attack, has been widely discussed and interpreted as politically significant.

The crisis has since escalated to the diplomatic level. Bangladeshi authorities summoned representatives of the Indian High Commission to seek cooperation in addressing the situation. In response, New Delhi summoned Bangladesh’s High Commissioner to India, Riaz Hamidullah, and issued a strongly worded diplomatic démarche expressing concern over the deteriorating security environment in Bangladesh. Citing safety concerns, India temporarily suspended operations at several visa application centres, a decision that significantly affected Bangladeshi citizens who travel to India for medical treatment, education, and trade. Notably, this marks the second instance in 2025 in which India curtailed the activities of its diplomatic mission in Bangladesh. A similar decision was taken on 6 February 2025 following a series of protests and security incidents.

In conclusion, while there is no definitive confirmation regarding those responsible for Osman Hadi’s assassination, public opinion within Bangladesh has increasingly directed blame toward India. This perception is deeply rooted in the nature of India-Bangladesh relations during Sheikh Hasina’s tenure, which were characterized by close cooperation in areas such as security, connectivity, and economic integration. Key milestones, including the 2015 Land Boundary Agreement that resolved longstanding border disputes, further strengthened bilateral ties. For many Bangladeshi citizens, India’s close association with the Hasina government has contributed to the belief that New Delhi bears indirect responsibility for the political repression and instability that followed, thereby fuelling the current wave of anti-Indian sentiment.