For Bangladesh, it is the high time to focus on political violence, democratic space, and electoral stability in country that is going to face a general election in coming February, 2026 after a massive power shift in July, 2024. The death of Sharif Osman Hadi, a key organiser of July 2024 mobilisation, at a politically sensitive moment has exposed deep vulnerabilities in Bangladesh’s pluralistic and participatory democratic space. While public grief is legitimate, the transformation of mourning and protest into aggressive and destructive forms poses serious risks to democratic stability, electoral credibility, and long-term political pluralism. This commentary argues that no political actor—whether in power, in opposition, or aspiring to power—benefits from the erosion of democratic space. Instead, such erosion disproportionately empowers authoritarian tendencies, security-centric governance, and political extremism.

Pluralism, Participation, and Democratic Space

Pluralistic participatory democracy rests on three core pillars:

  • Open political competition
  • Non-violent contestation
  • Deliberative engagement through argument, dissent, and persuasion

Democratic theorists broadly agree that when political conflict shifts from deliberation to coercion, democracy does not merely weaken—it changes character. Violence, or the credible threat of violence, narrows the public sphere and legitimises exceptional measures by the state. This process benefits actors who prefer order without accountability, rather than participation with uncertainty.

From a policy perspective, the critical insight is this: Democratic space is a shared good. Its contraction harms all political actors, regardless of their immediate position in the power structure.

The Political Economy of Democratic Shrinkage: Who Gains?

When pluralistic democratic space deteriorates, three categories of actors tend to benefit:

Conversely, the following actors lose:

Thus, from a rational-choice and institutional perspective, democratic shrinkage is a negative-sum outcome.

Violence After Political Tragedy: Strategic Consequences

The aggressive and destructive turn in protests following Hadi’s death has produced several unintended but predictable consequences:

These outcomes do not advance accountability, justice, or reform. Instead, they consolidate administrative and coercive power while marginalising deliberative politics.

Electoral Sensitivity and Systemic Risk

The fact that the attack on Hadi occurred after the announcement of the election schedule has significantly heightened political sensitivity. At such moments, even isolated violence can have systemic consequences:

  • Increased justification for restrictive measures
  • Shrinking campaign space for all actors
  • Erosion of trust in electoral neutrality
  • Reduced voter confidence and turnout

From a governance perspective, ensuring a peaceful, secure, and participatory election is now more critical than ever. Political instability at this stage threatens not only legitimacy but also post-election governability.

Post-Hadi Challenges: Responsibilities of Supporters and Political Actors

In the absence of Sharif Osman Hadi, his followers and allied civic actors face a defining test. The core challenge is not mobilisation, but direction.

Key responsibilities include:

Hadi’s political practice was rooted in struggle, courage, and responsibility—but also in public engagement and ethical restraint. Replacing these with impulsive aggression would contradict the very values he embodied.

Why Aggression Fails as a Political Strategy

Empirical political experience and democratic theory converge on one conclusion:

Violence does not defeat authoritarianism; it strengthens it. While assassination or violent suppression cannot eliminate ideas, violent reactions can undermine their social legitimacy. Ideological and intellectual movements succeed only when they expand persuasion, not fear.

In pluralistic democracies, victory is achieved through discourse, argument, critique, and sustained civic participation—not through force.

Policy Implications and Recommendations

For the State

  • Ensure impartial investigation and accountability
  • Protect peaceful assembly and expression
  • Avoid excessive securitisation of political activity

For Political Parties (in power and opposition)

  • Publicly reject violence and retaliatory mobilisation
  • Commit to peaceful electoral competition
  • Defend democratic space as a collective interest

For Civil Society and Movements

  • Channel protest into deliberative, lawful forms
  • Invest in intellectual, cultural, and policy-based engagement
  • Resist radicalisation and emotional escalation

The erosion of pluralistic participatory democracy does not produce winners—it produces authoritarian drift, political stagnation, and social fragmentation. Hot-headed reactions serve neither justice nor reform. At this critical juncture, Bangladesh’s political future depends on the ability of all actors to uphold democratic restraint, protect electoral integrity, and reaffirm commitment to debate over destruction.

Sharif Osman Hadi’s ideas cannot be extinguished by violence, nor can they triumph through it. Their endurance depends on reasoned struggle, ethical courage, and sustained democratic engagement and participation in the days to come.