Bangladesh's Yunus announces elections in April 2026
Bangladesh will hold elections in early April 2026 for the first time since a mass uprising overthrew the government last year, interim leader Muhammad Yunus said Friday.
The South Asian nation of around 170 million people has been in political turmoil since former prime minister Sheikh Hasina was ousted by a student-led revolt in August 2024, ending her iron-fisted rule of 15 years.
"I am announcing to the citizens of the country that the election will be held on any day in the first half of April 2026," said Yunus, the 84-year-old Nobel Peace Prize winner who leads the caretaker government.
Political parties jostling for power have been repeatedly demanding Yunus fix an election timetable, while he has said time is needed as the country requires an overhaul of its democratic institutions after Hasina's tenure.
"The government has been doing everything necessary to create an environment conducive to holding the election," he added in the television broadcast, while repeating his warning that reforms were needed.
"It should be remembered that Bangladesh has plunged into deep crisis every time it has held a flawed election," he said, in a speech given on the eve of the Eid al-Adha holiday in the Muslim-majority nation.
"A political party usurped power through such elections in the past, and became a barbaric fascist force."
Hasina's rule saw widespread human rights abuses, and her government was accused of politicising courts and the civil service, as well as staging lopsided elections.
The interim government had already repeatedly vowed to hold elections before June 2026, but said the more time it had to enact reforms, the better.
- Reform of 'utmost importance' -
The key Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), seen as the election frontrunner, has in recent weeks been pushing hard for polls to be held by December.
Army chief General Waker-Uz-Zaman, in a speech to officers in May, also said that elections should be held by December, according to both Bangladeshi media and military sources.
Days after that speech, the government warned that political power struggles risked jeopardising gains that have been made.
"Those who organise such elections are later viewed as culprits, and those who assume office through them become targets of public hatred," Yunus said on Friday.
"One of the biggest responsibilities of this government is to ensure a transparent... and widely participatory election so that the country does not fall into a new phase of crisis," he added.
"That is why institutional reform is of utmost importance."
sa/pjm/rsc
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
9 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Taliban leader slams Trump's travel ban on Afghans, calls U.S. an ‘oppressor'
The top Taliban leader on Saturday slammed President Trump's travel ban on Afghans, calling the United States an oppressor, as Afghanistan's rulers seek greater engagement with the international community. The comments from Hibatullah Akhundzada marked the first public reaction from the Taliban since the Trump administration in recent days moved to bar citizens from 12 countries, including Afghanistan, from entering the U.S. Trump's executive order largely applies to Afghans hoping to resettle in the U.S. permanently, as well as those hoping to go to America temporarily, including for university studies. Since returning to power in Afghanistan in 2021, the Taliban have imposed harsh measures, including banning women from public places and education for women and girls beyond the sixth grade. Although they have so far failed to gain recognition as the country's official government, the Taliban have diplomatic relations with several countries, including China and Russia. Akhundzada released his message on the Islamic holiday of Eid al-Adha, also known as the 'Feast of Sacrifice,' from the southern city of Kandahar, where he has set up base but is rarely seen in public. In a 45-minute audio recording shared by Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid on X, Akhundzada denounced the Trump administration for imposing 'restrictions on people.' 'Citizens from 12 countries are barred from entering their land — and Afghans are not allowed either,' he said. 'Why? Because they claim the Afghan government has no control over its people and that people are leaving the country. So, oppressor! Is this what you call friendship with humanity?' He blamed the U.S. for the deaths of Palestinian women and children in Gaza, linking this allegation to the travel ban. 'You are committing acts that are beyond tolerance,' he added. The Trump administration says the measure is meant to protect U.S. citizens from 'aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes.' It argues that Afghanistan lacks a competent central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and lacks appropriate screening and vetting measures. It also says Afghans who visit the U.S. have a high visa overstay rate. Trump also suspended a core refugee program in January, all but ending support for Afghans who had allied with the U.S. and leaving tens of thousands of them stranded. Also on Saturday, the Taliban prime minister said that all Afghans who fled the country after the collapse of the former Western-backed government are free to return home, promising they would be safe. 'Afghans who have left the country should return to their homeland,' Mohammad Hassan Akhund said. 'Nobody will harm them.' 'Come back to your ancestral land and live in an atmosphere of peace,' the Taliban prime minister said in a message on X, instructing officials to ensure returning refugees were given shelter and support. He also used the occasion to criticize the media for making what he said were 'false judgments' about Afghanistan's Taliban rulers and their policies. 'We must not allow the torch of the Islamic system to be extinguished,' he said. 'The media should avoid false judgments and should not minimize the accomplishments of the system. While challenges exist, we must remain vigilant.' The Taliban swept into the capital of Kabul and seized most of Afghanistan in a blitz in mid-August 2021 as the U.S. and NATO forces were in the last weeks of their pullout from the country after 20 years of war. The offensive prompted a mass exodus, with tens of thousands of Afghans thronging the airport in chaotic scenes, hoping for a flight out on the U.S. military airlift. People also fled across the border, to neighboring Iran and Pakistan. Among those escaping the new Taliban rulers were former government officials, journalists, activists and those who had helped the U.S. during its campaign against the Taliban. Separately, Afghans in neighboring Pakistan who are awaiting resettlement are also dealing with a deportation drive by the Islamabad government to get them out of the country. Almost a million have left Pakistan since October 2023 to avoid arrest and expulsion. Press writes for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion: Where are the compassionate and moderating voices on Trump's travel ban?
Before he secured the Republican nomination for president in 2016, Donald Trump announced that he would seek 'a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.' Reaction, including from human rights organizations and fellow Republicans, was swift, and, for the most part, was characterized by astonishment, outrage and condemnation. Marco Rubio posted online, 'I disagree with Donald Trump's latest proposal. His habit of making offensive and outlandish statements will not bring Americans together.' At that time, Trump was an unknown entity in politics, and many believed he would never actually seek to implement the outrageous things he said. Unfortunately, one of Trump's first actions as a newly inaugurated president in January 2017 was to sign an executive order banning nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. This was immediately met with lawsuits and protests. The order was amended two different times in response to court challenges; eventually, a scaled-back version was upheld by the Supreme Court. To their credit, many leaders and members of the president's party were dismayed by this ban at the time. They saw it for what it was — a threat to the religious freedom guaranteed by the Constitution. They could see it as a clear attack on the pluralism that has long guaranteed that our nation — a nation of immigrants — remains a haven for people seeking to practice their religion according to their conscience while also contributing to society. When candidate Trump first voiced his pledge to prevent Muslims from entering the U.S. in 2015, Utah Governor Herbert spoke out strongly against this idea: 'I am the governor of a state that was settled by religious exiles who withstood persecution after persecution, including an extermination order from another state's governor. In Utah, the First Amendment still matters. That will not change so long as I remain governor.' We remember both the early rhetoric of candidate Trump and the later actions of President Trump well. It was shocking and disorienting to watch his efforts to discriminate against others. It was disheartening to watch a political party descend into unchristian and uncharitable legalese, all with the aim to exclude others based solely on their faith or nationality. Mormon Women for Ethical Government was born in response to these efforts. At the outset, MWEG's founders envisioned a small group of women working together through peaceful, faithful, nonpartisan and proactive ways to counteract the unbelievable turn the government was making. But these women were not alone in their desire to take action. They were quickly joined by thousands of other women of faith who were ready to work for a more peaceful, just and ethical world. Over time, MWEG has become a strong voice in advocating for compassionate and moderating forces in government. The organization continues to attract women who want to proactively and peacefully support systems rooted in constitutional principles and the rule of law. We now have women in all 50 states engaging in the political arena as informed and principled citizens. Though much has changed since the formation of MWEG eight years ago, immigration remains a central and divisive issue. Immigrants, including refugees and asylum seekers, have been victims of dehumanizing language and unfair stereotyping. The current administration has invoked the Alien Enemies Act to deport people without due process. It has detained students without cause, deported a man by mistake and refused a Supreme Court order to facilitate his return, attempted to end birthright citizenship, revoked student visas, ended temporary protected status for many, and suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). This week, President Trump signed another proclamation that bans citizens from 12 countries from entering the U.S. In comparison to eight years ago, the large-scale response has been muted or even resigned. As the world has changed and political rhetoric has become ever more extreme, have we changed with it? Do things that were once the source of personal outrage and deep concern still concern us? Has our once-strong commitment to love our neighbor as ourself weakened? And, if we cannot love them, are we at least as committed to maintaining their claim to Constitutional protections as we were eight years ago? As an organization, MWEG is committed to amplifying the best aspects of our Christian faith. That faith is rooted in a gospel of generosity. We are also committed to preserving the Constitution that, among other things, protects our ability, as members of a minority faith, to participate freely in civic life, to express our views and to practice our religion without fear of repercussions. Actions like this ban seem directed at a particular group, but they actually undermine the constitutional rights that protect all of us from government overreach. As citizens of a free nation, we can and should speak out when we see those rights being violated. In 2017, the threat was widely recognized by leaders and citizens from both parties. It is worth contemplating why this is no longer the case.
New York Post
12 hours ago
- New York Post
NYC needs a mayoral race centered on the city's needs, NOT Democrats' anti-Trump obsessions
Last week's debate confirmed that the Democrats running for mayor are competing almost exclusively on a near-irrelevant issue: who can fight President Donald Trump the most. The field of nine mentioned Trump more than 80 times in two hours; the only other theme to come close was the eight candidates' pile-on of the clear frontrunner among them, Andrew Cuomo. And even Cuomo has joined the club-Trump club: When he first entered the race, he talked about working with the White House; now he, too, vows to resist. Advertisement Reality check: New York City depends on more than $100 billion a year in federal aid. No, the law doesn't give any president a free hand to mess with most of that, but a Republican president with a Republican Congress is all too able to change the law to slow that flow. Especially when the feds face near-$2 trillion annual deficits, the city votes overwhelmingly Democratic, and New York state's few GOP members of Congress are stretched to cover their own constituents' needs. Advertisement The president is a son of Queens who rose to fame as an NYC developer, a lifelong Post reader still fond of the city even though the likes of state Attorney General Tish James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg have done their best to bankrupt and imprison him. With the eager cooperation of hack judges put on the bench by the city's Dem clubhouses. Yes, base Democratic voters despise the president; that's why James, Bragg & Co. waged their scorched-earth (but failed) lawfare against him, and why the mayoral candidates talk so tough. Advertisement Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani bragging he's 'Donald Trump's worst nightmare, as a progressive Muslim immigrant'; ex-city Comptroller Scott Stringer using his first TV ad to call the prez 'this schmuck' and promise to 'tell Trump where to stick it.' State Sen. Zellnor Myrie is offering a lunatic fantasy of withholding New Yorkers' federal income taxes, pretending 'that gives us the tax base so we can be independent of the White House.' Whaaat? Council Speaker Adrienne Adams announcing her run with trash talk about 'a mayor who will stand up to Trump'; Cuomo telling Politico his plan to stop Trump: 'I would spend eight years in Washington.' Gotham needs its mayor here; mayors have no power to intercept federal income taxes; Trump would like nothing more than to have a nepo baby Muslim socialist as a foil. Advertisement And the Democratic activist base that cheers this idiocy is only a fraction of the city's registered Democrats, let alone of the whole population. New York as a whole is a lot more in tune with Mayor Eric Adams' approach of working with Trump where practical, and fighting him as necessary — not far off his approach to President Joe Biden, by the way, and rightly so. Even if standing up to Biden won him a federal investigation that may well have ended his political career. We can't say where all this leads, only that Trump Derangement Syndrome has produced a Democratic primary where the basic needs and interests of New York City are thisclose to irrelevant. Even candidates that we know know better are painting themselves into corners that will ill-serve the general public if they win. Regular New Yorkers want homes they can afford, schools that teach, safe streets and subways; anti-Trump performative politics loses ground on every front. Whoever wins the Democratic primary will certainly be the favorite to win in November, but it sure feels like this is a race to an idiotic bottom. A race that's setting up New York City to lose, big time.
