Category: Uncategorized

The killing of a Hindu man during recent violent protests in Bangladesh has pushed already strained ties between Dhaka and Delhi into a deeper crisis.

As the two neighbours accuse each other of destabilising relations, questions are growing over whether their once close, time-tested relationship is fraying beyond repair.

In India, the episode has sparked protests by Hindu nationalist groups. The man who was killed – Dipu Chandra Das, 27 – a member of Bangladesh’s Hindu minority, was accused of blasphemy and beaten to death by a mob last week in Mymensingh, in northern Bangladesh.

The incident happened hours before violent protests broke out over the murder of Sharif Osman Hadi, a prominent student leader, in the capital, Dhaka.

Hadi’s supporters alleged that the main suspect, who they say is linked to the Awami League – the party of deposed prime minister Sheikh Hasina – had fled to India, further fuelling anti-India sentiment in Muslim-majority Bangladesh. Bangladeshi police, however, said there was no confirmation that the suspect had left the country.

In recent days, the South Asian neighbours have suspended visa services in several cities, including Delhi, and accused each other of failing to ensure adequate security for their diplomatic missions.

The two countries have also summoned each other’s high commissioners to raise their security concerns.

“I sincerely hope tensions don’t escalate further on both sides,” Riva Ganguly Das, a former Indian high commissioner to Dhaka, told the BBC, adding that the “volatile situation” in Bangladesh made it difficult to predict which way things would go.

Anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh is not new.

A section of Bangladeshis has always resented what they see as India’s overbearing influence on their country, especially during Hasina’s 15-year rule before she was deposed in an uprising last year.

The anger has grown since Hasina took refuge in India and Delhi, so far, hasn’t agreed to send her back despite several requests from Dhaka.

In the aftermath of Hadi’s killing, some young leaders are reported to have made provocative anti-India statements.

In recent weeks, Bangladeshi security forces had to stop protesters from marching toward the Indian high commission in Dhaka.

Last week, a mob pelted the Indian assistant high commission building in Chittagong with stones, prompting outrage from Delhi. Police later detained 12 people in connection with the incident, but they were released later without any charge.

There were counter rallies in India. Bangladesh strongly objected to a protest by a Hindu group outside its diplomatic premises in Delhi, calling it “unjustifiable”.

“I have not seen this kind of suspicion and mistrust between the two sides before,” Humayun Kabir, a former senior Bangladeshi diplomat, said.

He added that both sides should protect each other’s diplomatic missions according to established norms.

Some readers may find the details below disturbing.

The brutal lynching of Das, a garment factory worker, has only added to the anger on the Indian side.

He was accused of insulting the Prophet Muhammad and was lynched by a mob, who then tied his body to a tree and set it on fire.

Videos of the killing were widely shared on social media, triggering outrage on both sides of the border.

Bangladesh’s interim government, led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, said there was “no place for such violence in the new Bangladesh”, promising that no one involved in the killing would be spared.

Bangladeshi police say they have arrested 12 people in connection with the killing of Das.

Analysts say his killing has once again raised questions over the safety of minorities and civil society activists in Bangladesh, with religious fundamentalists becoming more assertive and intolerant after Hasina’s exit.

Radical Islamists have desecrated hundreds of Sufi shrines, attacked Hindus, prevented women from playing football in some areas and have also curtailed music and cultural shows.

Human rights groups have also expressed increasing concerns over rising mob violence in Bangladesh in the past year.

“Hardline elements of society now see themselves as the mainstream, and they don’t want to see pluralism or diversity of thought in the country,” Asif Bin Ali, a Bangladeshi political analyst, said.

“These radical elements are dehumanising people and institutions by setting a narrative that they are pro-India. That gives a green light to others on the ground to attack them.”

Many in Bangladesh suspect Islamist radicals to be part of the mob that vandalised and set fire to the buildings of two Bangladesh dailies – The Daily Star and Prothom Alo – and a cultural institution last week, accusing them of being pro-India.

Civil society activists in Bangladesh have criticised the interim administration for failing to stop the recent violence. Even before the protests, the interim government was under scrutiny as it struggled to maintain law and order and deliver results amid the political turmoil.

Experts like Ashok Swain argue that right-wing leaders on both sides are making provocative statements for their own benefit, inflaming tension and public anger.

“A large section of the Indian media is also playing up events in Bangladesh and portraying that the country is descending into communal chaos,” says Mr Swain, a professor of peace and conflict research at Uppsala University in Sweden.

“People should realise that stability in Bangladesh is key to India’s security, particularly in the north-east,” he says.

With the interim administration in Dhaka facing criticism over its lack of control and legitimacy, there is broad consensus that an elected government would be better positioned to address Bangladesh’s domestic and foreign challenges.

The country is scheduled to hold elections on 12 February but until then, Yunus has the difficult task of avoiding further violence.

With Ms Hasina’s Awami League banned from taking part in the polls, it’s widely expected that the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) will emerge as the winner.

But Islamist political parties like the Jamaat-e-Islami can pose a challenge to the BNP.

There are worries that there could be more violence in the coming days as hardline religious parties exploit anti-India sentiments.

“The biggest victim of this anti-India politics is not India, it’s Bangladeshi citizens themselves – like secular minded individuals, centrists and minorities,” warns Asif Bin Ali.

He says the current narrative shows that anyone or any institution who criticises fundamentalists can be “dehumanised by labelling them pro-India, and attacks on them can be justified”.

Policy makers in India are aware of the changing dynamics in Bangladesh.

An Indian parliamentary panel said developments in Bangladesh pose “the greatest strategic challenge” to Delhi since the country’s independence war in 1971.

Former Bangladeshi diplomats like Humayun Kabir feel that India should accept the ground reality and reach out to Bangladesh to rebuild trust.

“We are neighbours and inter-dependent,” Mr Kabir says.

Delhi has already indicated that it will engage with an elected government in Bangladesh and that could pave the way for a diplomatic reboot.

Until then, experts on both sides caution that anger on the street must not be allowed to further strain bilateral ties.

South Africans have long suspected corruption and political interference were at work in the police force but in the past few months allegations appearing to confirm this have been aired in two public inquiries.

President Cyril Ramaphosa is currently digesting the contents of an interim report from a commission he established to investigate illegality within the police.

It was set up after senior police officer Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi alleged in July that organised crime groups had infiltrated the government.

His dramatic intervention led to Police Minister Senzo Mchunu being put on special leave.

Lt-Gen Mkhwanazi, who heads up the police in KwaZulu-Natal province, claimed that Mchunu had ties to crime kingpins and this was why he shut down an elite unit investigating political murders.

Mchunu, a senior member of Ramaphosa’s African National Congress (ANC) and a close ally of the president, has denied any wrongdoing.

But to investigate the allegations, Ramaphosa asked retired Constitutional Court judge Mbuyiseli Madlanga to head up a public inquiry. Parliament in Cape Town set up its own panel to investigate the matter.

“As I see it now, this is terrorism,” Gen Mkhwanazi said appearing as the Madlanga Commission’s first witness in September.

These are “people who want to take over government, not through the ballot paper but through these criminal activities”.

In the three months of testimony from the parallel inquiries, South Africans have heard about an alleged drug cartel with political connections and a businessman, who is awaiting trial for attempted murder, with alleged ties to leading government figures. A witness at the Madlanga Commission was also murdered after giving evidence.

Here’s what we’ve learned so far:

Among the most explosive evidence was the testimony given by police crime intelligence boss Lt-Gen Dumisani Khumalo.

Appearing before the Madlanga Commission within the first month of hearings, Lt-Gen Khumalo alleged there was a drug trafficking cartel, headed by individuals who he called the Big Five, operating in several provinces, which had “penetrated the political sphere”.

He named two figures from the five alleged leaders of this criminal gang, one of them being controversial businessman Vusimusi “Cat” Matlala.

Mr Matlala is currently facing 25 criminal charges, among them attempted murder.

These stem from three separate incidents that occurred between 2022 and 2024. He has denied all the charges against him.

The crime intelligence boss claimed the Big Five led a network with widespread influence across the country.

He alleged that it was a cartel, that was operating both locally and abroad, and dealt mainly with narcotics but also carried out contract killings “associated with the drug trafficking processes”, cross-border hijackings and kidnappings.

This cartel had tentacles within the country’s criminal justice system, and this allowed them to “manipulate investigations, suppress evidence [and] obstruct legal proceedings that threaten their activities”, Lt-Gen Khumalo added.

It was this grouping that was allegedly behind the disbandment of the political killings task team (PKTT), which was working mainly in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal provinces.

This is because the cartel “mistakenly thought the PKTT was investigating” them, Lt-Gen Khumalo told the commission.

“The Big Five has already penetrated the political sphere and there are documented cases of high-profile connections in the political arena,” the policeman alleged.

Another witness at the Madlanga Commission had been part of the PKTT. Anonymised – and known only as “witness C” – he also mentioned what he called the Big Five cartel, alleging it had “full control and oversight” in every government department.

Central to the allegations against the suspended police minister is his alleged close relationship with “Cat” Matlala.

At the Madlanga Commission, Mkhwanazi repeated claims he had made at a press conference in July that Mchunu was indirectly receiving financial support from the businessman to fund his “political endeavours”.

He shared copies of text messages and a payment allegedly made by Matlala to prove this at the time. These payments were seemingly facilitated by a third party.

During his appearance at the Madlanga Commission Mchunu refuted the allegations saying that he had “never been accused of corruption, not once”.

“This is the first time I get accused of such.”

Mr Matlala had a lucrative contract with the police before it was abruptly cancelled when he was charged for attempted murder in May.

In 2001, he was convicted and served time for the possession of stolen goods.

Over the years, he would be arrested for a string of alleged crimes, including house robberies, a cash-in-transit heist and assault, but in all cases he denied involvement and was either acquitted or had the charges withdrawn against him.

Appearing at the parliamentary inquiry, Mr Matlala said he had turned his life around in 2017, when he “formally registered my first business which was a security business”.

As he is now in custody over the attempted murder charge, he gave evidence with restraints around his ankles. Over the course of his two-day testimony in front of MPs Mr Matlala laid bare his description of relationships with former and current ministers as well as top police officials.

Apart from being accused of having close ties to Mchunu, Mr Matlala has been linked to others in the police force.

He denied knowing the senior police officers and politicians personally but admitted making payments for ANC-related activities.

“From what I understand, the minister [Mchunu] sent [a third party] to go ask for donations there and there, and I was one of them,” Mr Matlala told MPs.

He also told the parliamentary panel that after the authorities had returned firearms seized from him, former Police Minister Bheki Cele had demanded “a facilitation fee” of 1m rand ($60,000; £45,000) to which he only paid half the amount. Mr Matlala alleged that Cele also allegedly asked for this money to stop harassment from the police.

Cele, who testified before Mr Matlala’s appearance at the parliamentary committee, admitted to MPs that he had known Mr Matlala for a couple of months and had stayed at his penthouse on two occasions as these were “freebies”.

He, however, denied receiving money from Mr Matlala.

Mr Matlala has not yet appeared at the Madlanga Commission but is expected to have a chance to speak there at some point next year.

Various witnesses, however, painted a different picture of Mr Matlala’s relationship with the police.

Witness C told the Madlanga Commission that Mr Matlala had “close relationships with senior [police] officials” and had detailed the extent of this after police arrested him back in May.

The witness alleged that Mr Matlala contributed money towards the now-suspended police minister’s presidential ambitions within the ANC even though he did not believe he would win.

A witness at the Madlanga Commission was murdered in early December, just three weeks after he gave testimony.

It is not clear if the two events were connected.

Marius van der Merwe, who was identified only as “Witness D” during his appearance, was killed in full view of his family.

He had just returned home in the evening and was gunned down as he waited for the front gate to open. No arrests have been made but three people of interest have been identified by police. The motive for the shooting is unclear.

The identity of Mr Van der Merwe, a former police officer who ran a private security company, was confirmed by authorities after his murder.

In his appearance in front of Judge Madlanga he had implicated officials, including Brig Julius Mkhwanazi (no relation to Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi) who was acting police chief for an area including parts of Johannesburg.

There he had claimed Brig Mkhwanazi ordered him to get rid of the body of a man accused of robbery who had allegedly been tortured and killed by police officials.

Commenting on this, Mr Van der Merwe told the commission: “I really did not have a chance to agree. I felt like I was being forced.”

In his testimony, Brig Mkhwanazi denied having any involvement in the case including the alleged disposal of the body. Instead, he told the commission he had been called to the scene of a crime within the municipality and had stayed there for “two to three minutes”.

Mr Van der Merwe’s death after giving evidence sparked outrage across South Africa.

The targeting of whistleblowers has become common in the country, with rights groups like Human Rights Watch noting that “many face retaliation, loss of livelihood and even loss of life”.

The authorities revealed that Mr Van der Merwe had refused witness protection following his testimony at the commission.

Ramaphosa’s spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said that Judge Madlanga’s interim report would not be made public as it was not “helpful to start… debating on something that is half-baked”.

The final report – expected next year – “will be made available to the public”.

“The commissioner will [however] advise the president on areas that are of national security sensitivity and how those areas will need to be managed,” he added in a briefing to journalists.

The Madlanga Commission is carrying out its work in three phases; the first phase gave witnesses a chance to present their allegations.

The second phase, currently under way, allows those implicated by evidence given to the inquiry, like Mchunu, to respond to the allegations made against them.

The final phase will recall witnesses mentioned in the first phase to clarify or make additions to their statements.

The Madlanga Commission was given six months to complete its work and submit a final report, but this can be extended as the “president may determine”, according to its terms of reference. It is not clear how long the parliamentary inquiry will run but it too is expected to resume hearings in 2026.

South Africans will now have to wait until some point next year to read the findings and recommendations from both inquiries. The question they are asking is whether these will be enough to force the government to deal with the problems critics say exist in the police service.