The relationship between the state and its citizens is fundamentally a relationship of trust. When law enforcement agencies and ordinary people find themselves standing face-to-face in confrontation, it is often a manifestation of a deficit of that trust. In recent years, it has repeatedly been observed that a single incident, an arrest, a video of an operation, or a political or issue-based demonstration can quickly escalate into clashes between police and the public. This raises an urgent question: where does the problem lie? Are law enforcement agencies unable to perform their duties independently, or has a segment of society lost respect for the rule of law? Or does the unease stem from both sides-rooted in accumulated mistrust and structural weaknesses?
Within the state structure, responsibilities are clearly defined. Internal law and order is maintained by the Bangladesh Police; border security is entrusted to the Border Guard Bangladesh; and the protection of national sovereignty rests with the Bangladesh Army. These institutions are organs of the state, not of any political party-such is the declaration of the Constitution and institutional policy. Yet in lived reality, when citizens perceive bias in the application of the law, or when members of the forces complain that political pressure and social distrust hinder their work, it becomes clear that there remains a gap between formal neutrality and practical neutrality.
The fundamental principle of the rule of law is that no one is above it. To make this principle effective, enforcement must be necessary, proportionate, and accountable. International human rights standards emphasize that the use of force is acceptable only when it is indispensable to control a situation and carried out with minimal harm. Excessive force is unacceptable, but complete inaction renders the state ineffective. Failure to maintain this delicate balance leads to recurring conflict. In Bangladesh, the pressure on policing structures is considerable-high population density, rapid urbanization, political polarization, and limited manpower and technological capacity all complicate the landscape. Compared internationally, the ratio of police officers to population remains limited; long working hours, inadequate rest, and gaps in modern training can affect professional performance. As a result, even a minor misstep can spiral into a major crisis.
Yet placing the entire burden of responsibility on law enforcement would obscure reality. Weaknesses within the political framework also contribute significantly to conflict. Democracy is not confined to election day; it is a continuous process built upon transparent elections, tolerance of dissent, an independent judiciary, and administrative neutrality. When controversies arise regarding electoral processes or institutional impartiality, citizens often turn to the streets as an alternative means of expressing their demands. History bears witness that the streets in Bangladesh have been a vehicle for positive change. However, when they become a permanent arena of confrontation, the consequences for the economy, education, and social stability are profound. Investment declines, employment is disrupted, and ordinary lives are overshadowed by uncertainty.
Young people are frequently accused of disregarding the law or responding too quickly to provocation. Yet sociological analysis suggests that prolonged unemployment, substance abuse, skill mismatches, and limited social mobility foster deep frustration among the youth. Completing higher education without securing suitable employment, doubts about transparency in recruitment, or perceptions of political favoritism generate resentment. When this frustration converges with organized political agitation, the risk of confrontation intensifies. Therefore, young people should not be viewed as objects of control but as partners in nation-building. Expanding employment opportunities, supporting entrepreneurship, enhancing technological training, and ensuring transparent recruitment systems would narrow the space for despair.
The digital age has further complicated the situation. On social media platforms, partial videos, reinterpreted old incidents, or outright misinformation can go viral within moments. Algorithm-driven platforms tend to amplify sensational content because it captures attention quickly. Consequently, public opinion often forms before the full context of an event emerges. When people are agitated by rumors or distorted information, law and order can deteriorate rapidly. In this environment, the responsibility of the media has grown exponentially. Publishing or sharing unverified information is not merely a professional lapse; it can fuel social instability. At the same time, enhancing digital literacy among citizens is essential so they can verify information before forming judgments.
Recently, tensions emerged in Dhaka surrounding an incident involving a serving Deputy Commissioner (DC Masud), which triggered intense reactions across social media and reignited debates over mutual distrust between the administration and citizens. Divergent narratives about the facts and context quickly surfaced, illustrating how partial information in the digital era can shape public opinion at remarkable speed. Such episodes demonstrate that every administrative action is now subject to immediate public scrutiny, making transparency and effective communication strategies more critical than ever. At the same time, civil society bears responsibility to refrain from reacting impulsively without verification. Otherwise, a single administrative incident can escalate into a broader crisis in state-citizen relations.
Educational institutions, too, have become reflections of this wider instability. Political violence or prolonged shutdowns on campuses jeopardize students' futures. Various international studies indicate that the loss of even one academic year can have long-term consequences for income potential and skill development. Strengthening democratic student representation, ensuring transparent campus elections, and enforcing strict anti-violence policies could significantly reduce conflict risks. Turning educational institutions into battlegrounds of political rivalry ultimately undermines the nation's human capital.
International experience suggests that repressive strategies do not deliver long-term stability. Dialogue, institutional reform, and transparent investigations create pathways for rebuilding trust. In cases of violence, swift and impartial inquiries are essential-regardless of who stands accused, the law must apply equally. Police reform, human rights-based training, depoliticization, the adoption of modern technology, and independent oversight mechanisms can enhance accountability. Simultaneously, improving the speed and transparency of the judiciary is vital to prevent prolonged delays from deepening public mistrust.
Both the state and its citizens bear responsibility. Public threats against law enforcement officers or incitement to violence are criminal acts and must be addressed firmly. Conversely, allegations of abuse or misuse of power by security forces must not be suppressed; they require impartial investigation and resolution. This dual accountability forms the foundation of the rule of law. A strong state is not defined by severity alone, but by justice and accountability.
Bangladesh stands at a crossroads. Will instability further divide us, or will reform and dialogue lay the groundwork for renewed trust? History shows that the path out of crisis is forged through wisdom, tolerance, and justice. If the state ensures humane and transparent law enforcement, and citizens uphold responsible civic conduct, recurring confrontations between police and the public can be reduced. Building a stable and democratic future requires harmonizing strength with justice, firmness with humanity, and authority with accountability. That harmony is the first condition for rebuilding trust-and the only sustainable path to stability
The writer is an assistant professor & head, Department of Sociology, Rosey Mozammel Women's Honours College
