Police in Gazipur have arrested a college student after he used abusive language against Prime Minister Tarique Rahman and the government in a Facebook video. But the question is what crime was he arrested for?

Sifat Abdullah, a student of Adamjee Cantonment College, was picked up from his home in Gazipur’s Gacha area at around 8:30 pm on Thursday after a one-minute video complaining about unusually high electricity bills went viral.

In the video, Sifat showed electricity bills of around 4,000 taka and 5,000 taka for two consecutive months and used expletives while referring to the government and the prime minister.

Police have cited those remarks while explaining his detention.

“You know everything. A case will be filed against him and he will be sent to the court,” Sub-Inspector Mamun of Gacha Police Station told Daily Waadaa shortly after Sifat was taken into custody.

But the officer did not identify any law or section under which Sifat had been detained. Other reports quoting police on Friday similarly described the allegation as making “objectionable” or “vulgar” remarks about the prime minister and government without specifying the offence that had already allowed police to take him into custody.

Bangladesh no longer has the Digital Security Act, the law routinely invoked during the Awami League government against Facebook posts, cartoons and online comments critical of then-prime minister Sheikh Hasina and her administration.

The Digital Security Act was enacted in 2018 and repealed in 2023, when it was replaced by the Cyber Security Act. The latter was itself repealed on May 21, 2025 and replaced by the Cyber Security Ordinance. Parliament subsequently enacted the Cyber Security Act, 2026 on April 10 this year, effectively replacing the ordinance.

Crucially, several speech-related offences contained in the previous cyber laws had already been removed.

When the 2025 ordinance was issued, the government abolished nine controversial provisions of the 2023 Cyber Security Act, including sections 25, 29 and 31. Those provisions had covered, among other things, offensive or threatening information, online defamation and content alleged to create hostility or disturb public order.

The Cyber Security Act, 2026 retained the framework introduced by that ordinance. Its present Section 25 deals with sexual harassment, blackmail and publication of obscene or sexually abusive material — not criticism or abusive language directed at a politician.

The government has itself acknowledged that the current law does not contain the broad provisions on rumours, misinformation and defamatory content that existed under earlier cyber legislation.

Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed told parliament in June that the government was preparing separate amendments to deal with rumours, disinformation and defamatory online content. When parliament amended the Cyber Security Act on June 30, however, the change merely removed Section 20 concerning online gambling after a separate gambling law was enacted.

Salahuddin told parliament at the time that provisions dealing with misinformation, rumours and defamatory content were still being considered separately and would be brought later if approved.

That leaves no publicly identified cyber-law provision, on the facts disclosed by police so far, making it a criminal offence simply to swear at the prime minister.

Police could potentially invoke Section 54 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows an arrest without warrant in specified circumstances where there is credible information or reasonable suspicion concerning a cognisable offence.

But Section 54 is an arrest power, not an independent criminal offence. Police would still have to identify the underlying cognisable crime Sifat is suspected of committing. The provision has already surfaced in similar cases under the current government.

Human Rights Watch reported in April that police arrested Jamaat supporter Sawoda Sumi under Section 54 after describing Facebook comments as “anti-government.” Another man, Azizul Haque, was initially detained under Section 54 after sharing a controversial depiction of Prime Minister Rahman; police subsequently sought to apply cyber and anti-terrorism laws.

The circumstances surrounding Sifat’s arrest also recall a much broader practice under the previous Awami League government, when derogatory remarks about Sheikh Hasina frequently resulted in criminal cases.

The principal legal instrument was the Digital Security Act.

Section 25 criminalised transmitting information deemed “offensive,” false or threatening in circumstances that could damage a person's or the state's image or reputation or spread confusion.

Section 29 turned online defamation into a cyber offence by incorporating the defamation provisions of the Penal Code.

Section 31 criminalised certain online material said to create hostility, hatred or deterioration of law and order.

Police also had extensive authority under Section 43 to arrest without warrant where they believed an offence under the Act had been committed or was about to be committed.

Those powers were repeatedly used against government critics.

Human Rights Watch documented the 2020 arrests of cartoonist Ahmed Kabir Kishore, writer Mushtaq Ahmed, activist Didarul Bhuiyan and businessman Minhaz Mannan under the Digital Security Act over Facebook content criticising the Hasina government's handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.

In another case in 2020, a 15-year-old boy was arrested over a Facebook post accused of “defaming” Hasina. The allegation against the child included that he had disparaged the then-prime minister, according to reporting on the operation of the Digital Security Act.

Rights organisations repeatedly said Sections 25, 29 and 31 were among provisions used to criminalise criticism and dissent. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and ARTICLE 19 separately called for the law to be repealed or substantially rewritten.

Bangladesh’s Constitution nevertheless protects freedom of speech under Article 39, subject to restrictions imposed by law. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Bangladesh is a party, also protects political expression and criticism of public officials.

None of those protections prevents prosecution where speech itself satisfies the elements of an existing criminal offence, such as a genuine threat, incitement or another offence defined by law.

As of Friday, police had not publicly accused Sifat of threatening anyone, inciting violence, blackmailing anyone or committing another specified offence.

—