Sheikh Hasina’s 15-year rule ended on 5 August when she left her country for temporary refuge in India. The progeny of Bangladesh’s founding patriarch Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, she was once heralded as a transformative figure whose leadership ushered in an era of unprecedented economic prosperity for her nation. Under her aegis, Bangladesh experienced a remarkable surge in economic performance, characterised by a dramatic enhancement in export activity and an impressive elevation in the GDP growth rate.

The taka gained considerable strength, and Bangladesh emerged as a rising economic titan within South Asia. These advancements, largely attributed to Hasina’s policies aimed at job creation and economic stimulation, particularly for women, signified a period of remarkable progress. Despite these early successes, Hasina’s governance has increasingly drawn criticism and scrutiny, with her leadership increasingly termed dictatorial. This change can be attributed to three critical missteps that had not only overshadowed her earlier accomplishments but have also profoundly marred her legacy. One of Hasina’s most consequential errors was her disregard for democratic principles. Although she initially espoused a commitment to democratic governance, her approach to handling political opposition starkly contradicted these principles.

Hasina systematically marginalised opposition parties, ensuring that her party, the Awami League, maintained an unchallenged monopoly on power. This strategic sidelining of political rivals, coupled with the suppression of dissent, undermined the democratic fabric of Bangladesh. Hasina’s administration implemented a series of restrictive measures on media freedom, curtailing the ability of journalists and critics to openly challenge the government. The imposition of stringent censorship and the frequent shutdown of the internet were part of a broader strategy to stifle dissent and control the narrative.

The lack of a robust opposition and unchecked power led to a governance style that increasingly resembled authoritarianism, rather than the democratic ideals Hasina once championed. The second significant blunder in Hasina’s tenure was her unwavering defence of the controversial quota system in government jobs. Initially introduced by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1972 as a means to reward those who contributed to the country’s liberation, the system was intended to be a temporary measure. However, its continued application and expansion to subsequent generations became a source of widespread discontent. Hasina’s administration’s refusal to reform or abolish this system, despite mounting protests and demands for change, highlighted a troubling disconnect between the government and the needs of the populace.

The persistence of the quota system fueled widespread resentment, particularly among the youth. Hasina’s defence of the system, framed in terms of upholding her father’s legacy, was perceived as a failure to address the evolving sociopolitical landscape. Hasina’s rigid adherence to an outdated policy reluctance to acknowledge and address the grievances related to the quota system demonstrated a lack of adaptability and responsiveness to the legitimate concerns of the younger generation. The most egregious mistake of Hasina’s administration was the brutal suppression of student protests.

In recent years, demonstrations by students and young activists against various issues, including the quota system, were met with excessive force by state security apparatus, highlighting a severe breach of human rights. The sight of students being targeted and killed for protesting against perceived injustices was a stark contrast to the democratic values Hasina initially espoused. The cumulative effect of these critical errors – undermining democratic norms, defending an outdated and discriminatory quota system, and resorting to violent suppression of dissent has profoundly impacted Hasina’s legacy. While her early achievements in economic development were notable, these subsequent actions have overshadowed her successes and contributed to a perception of her leadership as increasingly authoritarian.

It is pertinent to mention that violent agitation and power vacuums are very unpredictable. They happen because of economic inequality, political repression, cultural tensions, and public discontent. These things build up over time to overthrow the established order. The specific triggers for change of government are often impossible to predict, as they can be something as innocent as the public self- immolation of a street vendor or the killing of innocent students. When an agitation starts, it doesn’t follow a set path. Instead, it is unpredictable and chaotic. Different groups form and vie for power, making the outcome uncertain.

Throughout history, we’ve seen that popular uprisings like in Bangladesh can swiftly overthrow stable governments. The concept that ordinary people should feel grateful for the ruler’s kindness is flawed and self-serving. Those in power often promote it. Good governance is not a special privilege granted to the masses but a fundamental duty and responsibility of those in authority. The people do not owe their leaders gratitude for simply fulfilling their essential obligations, such as maintaining public order, providing services, and protecting the rights and well-being of citizens. These are the minimum expectations of any competent government, not some generous gesture deserving of endless appreciation.

In this case the anti-quota protest agitation that finally brought her down is a classic case of mishandling that, some say, was rooted in her growing imperiousness. In 2018, following student protests against the unusually high quotas in government jobs, Hasina’s government decided to scrap the quotas. However, on June 5, Bangladesh’s High Court reinstated the quotas, sparking renewed protests. Instead of addressing the students’ concerns, Hasina unleashed a verbal tirade against them, suggesting she supported the quotas. The movement gained momentum, and Hasina ordered a police crackdown, with the pro-government Chhatra League also attacking the students.

Around 300 people, mostly students, died over the course of the agitation. The ensuing groundswell became a mass movement led by students, reminiscent of historical student-led agitations in Bangladesh. The more violent the crackdown, the fiercer the resistance leading to her downfall nay removal from office on 5 August. It was Marshal Joseph Stalin who used to say that “History is written by the victors”. But in the present case Sheikh Hasina Wajed has lost. (The writer is a retired senior IAS officer of the Punjab cadre and can be reached at Kaushikiaspunjab@gmail.com)