A curious paradox is unfolding in our country today. For years, citizens complained that the police were too powerful. Today, many complain that the police are too weak.
The irony is difficult to ignore. A society that once feared the police now increasingly fears the consequences of ineffective policing.
This paradox lies at the centre of Bangladesh's contemporary law and order challenge.
Following the July uprising and the political transition that culminated in the fall of the Awami League government, the Bangladesh police entered one of the most turbulent periods in its history.
Police stations came under attack, officers were assaulted, many senior officials went into hiding, and the force found itself confronting a level of public hostility unprecedented in recent decades.
Subsequent changes under the interim government and later under the BNP-led administration brought new leadership, fresh restructuring initiatives, and attempts at institutional reform.
Yet despite these efforts, questions remain about whether the force has fully recovered from the shock of those events.
The consequences are becoming increasingly visible in everyday life.
According to police headquarters data, there have been 283 attacks on police personnel across the country within the last six months.
Transparency International Bangladesh reported that during the first 100 days of the current government, the country experienced 605 murders and 196 kidnappings.
Statistics from Dhaka Metropolitan Police show that between March and May 2026 alone, there were 57 murder cases, 90 robbery and dacoity cases, 54 kidnapping cases, and 428 theft-related cases.
Statistics alone never tell the entire story. Yet they often reveal patterns that public debate struggles to acknowledge.
The growing concern is not merely the number of crimes being committed. Crime exists in every country regardless of government, ideology, or economic development. The deeper concern is the growing perception that criminals are becoming bolder while law enforcement is becoming increasingly cautious.
This shift matters because policing is fundamentally psychological.
Most people obey the law not because a police officer is physically present at every street corner. They obey because they believe the state possesses the ability and willingness to enforce the law if necessary.
The effectiveness of policing therefore depends not only on manpower, weapons, or technology. It depends on legitimacy, confidence, and public trust.
The uniform itself derives its power from a collective belief that the institution behind it is capable of acting decisively and fairly.
Once that belief begins to weaken, problems emerge rapidly.
Recent incidents illustrate this changing reality. Traffic police officers have reportedly been assaulted while performing routine duties. Vehicle drivers increasingly challenge traffic regulations and openly argue with officers.
Police stations have been surrounded by protesters over incidents that might previously have been resolved through administrative channels.
In some cases, police personnel appear reluctant to intervene forcefully even when confronted with clear violations of the law.
These developments may seem unrelated. In reality, they are connected manifestations of the same phenomenon: The gradual erosion of institutional authority.
Many officers themselves acknowledge that August 5 left deep psychological scars within the force. The issue is not simply administrative restructuring or leadership changes. It is about confidence.
A police officer who fears public backlash, departmental punishment, political consequences, legal complications, or uncertainty about future employment will inevitably behave differently from an officer who feels institutionally protected.
Every arrest becomes a potential controversy. Every use of authority becomes a potential risk. Every operational decision becomes subject to second-guessing.
The result is hesitation. For ordinary citizens, hesitation may appear harmless. For criminals, hesitation represents opportunity.
Throughout history, criminal networks have thrived whenever law enforcement institutions become distracted, divided, or uncertain.
Criminals possess an extraordinary ability to detect weakness. They quickly recognize when police officers are reluctant to intervene. They understand when internal divisions are affecting operational effectiveness. They notice when institutional morale declines.
Reports from various parts of Dhaka increasingly reflect this reality. Areas such as Mohammadpur, Adabor, and surrounding localities frequently make headlines due to robberies, gang violence, extortion, drug-related activities, and organized criminal operations. Residents speak of feeling unsafe even during daylight hours. Nightfall often brings additional anxiety.
In criminology, scholars often distinguish between actual crime and fear of crime. While the two are related, they are not identical.
A society can experience relatively moderate crime rates yet suffer from widespread fear. Conversely, societies with high crime rates sometimes normalize insecurity and become desensitized.
Bangladesh today appears to be facing both challenges simultaneously.
The rise of social media has amplified this phenomenon dramatically. Videos of robberies, assaults, kidnappings, murders, and other criminal incidents circulate instantly across digital platforms.
Millions of people consume these images repeatedly. Even individuals who have never personally encountered crime begin to internalize a sense of vulnerability.
Psychological research consistently demonstrates that repeated exposure to threatening information increases perceptions of danger.
The availability heuristic, a concept developed by psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, explains how people estimate risks based on examples that are easiest to recall.
When crime videos dominate social media feeds, individuals naturally conclude that crime is everywhere, even if their personal experiences suggest otherwise.
This perception generates profound social consequences.
People begin avoiding public spaces. Families become reluctant to allow children greater independence. Businesses alter operating hours. Citizens become increasingly suspicious of strangers. Social trust gradually declines.
Fear becomes a public health issue as much as a law and order issue.
This is why discussions about police morale should not be dismissed as institutional self-pity. A demoralized police force affects everyone.
Unfortunately, public discourse often frames the issue in simplistic terms.
Some argue that police deserve little sympathy because of their controversial role during previous political administrations.
Others insist that stronger policing alone will solve the problem.
Both perspectives miss the larger picture.
The objective should not be restoring the police of the past. Nor should it be weakening law enforcement further.
The objective should be creating a professional police force that is simultaneously confident, accountable, politically neutral, and operationally effective.
These goals are not contradictory. In fact, they are interdependent.
A police force lacking accountability eventually loses legitimacy. A police force lacking legitimacy eventually loses public trust. A police force lacking public trust eventually loses effectiveness.
Conversely, a police force lacking confidence cannot enforce the law consistently. A police force unable to enforce the law invites criminal opportunism.
The challenge is therefore not choosing between authority and accountability. The challenge is achieving both.
This requires more than administrative reshuffling. It requires institutional healing.
Police officers need assurance that professional decisions taken in good faith will receive institutional support. At the same time, citizens need assurance that abuses of authority will face transparent accountability.
Internal factionalism, political interference, and uncertainty regarding promotions or compulsory retirement must also be addressed because such issues inevitably affect field-level performance.
The broader lesson extends beyond policing itself.
Modern states depend upon institutions rather than individuals. Governments change. Political parties rise and fall. Public moods fluctuate.
Institutions must endure through these transitions. When an institution as critical as the police becomes deeply entangled in political conflict, it risks losing the neutrality necessary for long-term stability.
Bangladesh's current experience offers a cautionary lesson about the dangers of politicizing law enforcement.
When police become identified with a particular political order, they inevitably become vulnerable when that order changes.
Rebuilding trust afterward becomes a lengthy and painful process.
Yet rebuilding is essential.
Economic growth depends on security. Investment depends on predictability. Tourism depends on safety. Education depends on stable communities. Social harmony depends on public confidence that disputes will be resolved through legal institutions rather than private force.
None of these outcomes are possible if citizens lose faith in policing.
The restoration of that faith will not occur through public relations campaigns or optimistic official statements. It will emerge through visible professionalism, effective crime prevention, fair enforcement, and consistent accountability.
Citizens must see that criminals face consequences. Police officers must feel empowered to perform their duties without fear. Political actors must resist the temptation to use law enforcement as an instrument of partisan advantage.
The debate, therefore, should not focus solely on whether crime statistics are rising or falling. It should focus on something more fundamental: Whether the social contract between citizens and law enforcement is being repaired.
Because when police retreat, criminals advance. When criminals advance, fear spreads.
And when fear spreads, the costs extend far beyond crime itself.
They affect economic activity, social cohesion, democratic stability, and the everyday confidence that allows ordinary people to live freely.
HM Nazmul Alam is an Academic, Journalist, and Political Analyst based in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Currently he teaches at IUBAT.
