Fresh complaints seeking legal action against journalists, lawyers, actors and social media personalities over their comments on the July uprising have reignited debate over freedom of expression, with police yet to determine whether the disputed statements constitute criminal offences or protected political speech.
The complaints, filed at Shahbagh Police Station by an organization called Rashtra Sanglap Forum, accuse several public figures of insulting the July movement, its martyrs and injured protesters, spreading misinformation and attempting to rehabilitate the banned Awami League.
Those named include journalist and columnist Anis Alamgir, television presenter Soma Islam, lawyer and model Jannatul Ferdous Piya, columnist Momin Mehedi, model Maria Kispatta and actress-model Tusti.
Separate complaints have also been submitted against actress Meher Afroz Shawon, actress Mahiya Mahi and Shanta Farzana over comments related to the July uprising.
However, none of the complaints has yet been registered as a criminal case.
Police said the allegations have been referred to the Dhaka Metropolitan Police’s Cyber Unit to verify whether the cited Facebook posts, videos and online statements are authentic, whether they have been edited or taken out of context, and whether they violate existing laws.
Shahbagh Police Station Officer-in-Charge Md Moniruzzaman said further legal action would depend on the findings of the cyber investigation.
Police officials said investigators would examine the authenticity of the social media content before deciding whether any offence had been committed.
The complaints allege that some of the accused described the July uprising in derogatory terms, questioned the status of those killed or injured during the movement, or attempted to portray the protests in a misleading manner.
Journalist Anis Alamgir rejected the allegations, describing them as “baseless and intentional lies.”
“I have never insulted July or its martyrs,” he said, arguing that his criticism had been directed at what he described as mob violence, corruption and misuse of the movement’s name rather than the uprising itself.
“If criticism of those using July as a shield is treated as insulting July, then it is merely an attempt to suppress the truth,” he said, adding that if criticism is to be prohibited, the government should clearly define what citizens are allowed to say about the movement.
The complaints have also triggered wider concerns among journalists, legal experts and human rights advocates about the limits of political speech.
Senior journalist Masud Kamal said political opinions, however controversial, should not ordinarily become the subject of criminal prosecution.
“If someone merely says the expectations of the July movement were not fulfilled, that is a political opinion,” he told Bangla Tribune.
“But if someone incites violence or offers rewards to attack others, that crosses into criminal conduct.”
Human rights activist Abu Ahmed Faizul Kabir warned that responding to controversial opinions with criminal complaints could discourage open public debate.
“Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right and one of the foundations of a democratic society,” he said.
He argued that disagreeable opinions should generally be countered through facts, debate and public discussion rather than legal action, unless they clearly incite violence, hatred or discrimination.
Echoing similar concerns, Human Rights Support Society Executive Director Ijazul Islam said those commenting on emotionally sensitive issues should exercise responsibility, but cautioned against using legal complaints to silence differing views.
“If people begin fearing criminal consequences simply for expressing political opinions, the space for free expression will inevitably shrink,” he told Bangla Tribune.
The complaints come amid heightened political sensitivity surrounding public narratives of the July uprising, with observers saying the outcome of the police review could become an important test of how Bangladesh balances protection of the movement’s legacy with constitutional guarantees of free expression.