Big rhetoric, little opposition: When will NCP-Jamaat alliance find its feet?

Speaking at a party meeting on Monday, Amar Bangladesh Party (AB Party) Chairman Mojibur Rahman Monju, in a rhetoric-filled address, turned his criticism towards the NCP-Jamaat opposition alliance.

The opposition was failing to play the effective role expected of it, which he said was mainly down to a lack of experience.

He argued that national unity between the government and opposition was needed to revive the economy and prevent what he called a resurgence of “Awami fascism”.

In two broad strokes, Monju had touched upon the heart of the matter.

An opposition devoid of experience and the spectre of the fallen loom large in Bangladeshi politics. 

The tendency to frame every political disagreement as a fight against fascism is not helping either. 

Jamaat-e-Islami is weighed down by its own history. It was the party that first spawned the socially damaging label of “Jamaati”.

The NCP, on the other hand, was handed the keys to a revolution it helped shape, built on a fight its leaders bravely carried out against the torch-bearers of fascism.

While the NCP is new to the game — the party is barely a year old — Jamaat, as Monju pointed out, is a veteran, but only in presence, not substance.

Jamaat’s last major electoral victory came in 1991, when it secured 18 seats and supported the BNP in forming the government.

Jamaat would subsequently resign and join the Awami League and Jatiya Party in their movement for a caretaker government. In the 1996 election, it managed to secure a paltry three seats.

The party’s next major breakthrough came in 2001, when it secured cabinet positions as part of the BNP-led four-party alliance, winning 17 seats.

Over these years, Jamaat demonstrated that while it was well-versed in coalition and street politics, its positioning as opposition hasn’t had much of a reckoning.

Put together, the combination of Jamaat-NCP isn’t quite winning and it shows.

In the nine months since the last election, the opposition alliance has barely managed to make a mark. And when it has, it has often been for the wrong reasons.

Early hiccups

The early days of the opposition alliance have been marked by a lack of understanding of parliamentary procedures.

In March, during the parliament’s maiden session, opposition leaders chanted slogans and staged a walkout to protest the address by then President Mohammad Shahabuddin.

Addressing the incident, Speaker Major (retd) Hafiz Uddin Ahmed called it “inappropriate” and a departure from parliamentary tradition.

He observed that while walking out of the House was a common democratic practice, shouting slogans was not.

He noted that, as many lawmakers had been elected for the first time, it might take them some time to internalise parliamentary norms.

Two months after the elections, Speaker Hafiz Uddin Ahmed was forced to advise Jamaat MP Md Saiful Alam to be “more attentive” after the lawmaker mistakenly raised a point about a bill that had not been placed before the House.

Since then, there have been incidents in which several MPs attempted to speak without complying with Rule 71, which requires prior written notice.

Points of order have also been used to make political statements rather than raise procedural matters.

Time limits have been disregarded, and the agenda treated as an afterthought.

Unparliamentary language and personal attacks have also featured.

Most of these lapses have been attributed to a lack of training and orientation, which is understandable.

This, however, is not a party-specific matter. At least 209 of the 297 lawmakers (70%) are first-time parliamentarians, including the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader.

While parliamentary lapses can be excused, the alliance’s demonstrations outside Parliament, its activities on the ground and its fiery rhetoric send a message that the problem may be deeper.

Throwing things, seeing what sticks?

On October 30, addressing a rally, NCP Chief Nahid Islam said Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed must resign over the government’s failure to address the ongoing anarchy, killings and enforced disappearances in Bangladesh. He also demanded the resignation of Energy Minister Iqbal Hassan Mahmood Tuku over the fuel crisis.

The call was not new.

But he then upped the ante considerably.

“Otherwise, we will take this march across Bangladesh and hold demonstrations throughout the country. We will then besiege Prime Minister Tarique Rahman and force him to meet our demands,” he said.

A day later, as garment workers’ protests broke out, Nahid urged the government to accept the legitimacy of the unrest instead of calling it a conspiracy.

“If any banned organisation is instigating chaos, it should be subject to a proper investigation and legal action. However, using this as a pretext to dismiss the rights of thousands of workers as a ‘conspiracy’ only serves to expose the failure of the government’s intelligence agencies and administration.”

By then, however, many government ministers had already publicly alleged the involvement of those “outside the border” and fascist elements inside the country.

A day later, Jamaat-e-Islami Ameer Dr Shafiqur Rahman, surprisingly, did not outright support the workers’ demand, with a muted message only calling for a tough stance to curb unrest in the garment sector amid continued protests.

“Neither owners nor workers can establish their rights by destroying industrial establishments. We believe no worker would be involved in such activities,” he wrote.

On Tuesday, addressing a rally, Nahid again backed the workers and called for accountability from the government. 

“No just movement can be dismissed as a conspiracy. If fascists have infiltrated this movement and try to create anarchy, the government must take responsibility for that too,” he said.

The two parties would, however, find common ground again over LPG price hikes, calling for immediate rollbacks.

Between these incidents and the start of their tenure, the alliance has repeatedly pushed for constitutional amendments agreed upon before the elections, the July Charter and measures to prevent what it describes as the “re-emergence” of autocracy.

It has also issued statements on most hot-button issues, but its ability to stick to one and see it through has fallen short.

There hasn’t been any parliamentary scrutiny of government decisions, concrete policy alternatives or much follow-through.

The interest the parties have generated among the public also merits examination.

The Jamaat-led 11-party alliance, which includes the NCP, has also held three long marches in 2026, without making much of a wave, unless you count negative ones.

In fact, one of the marches generated controversy over a motorcade procession that disrupted daily life.

Toll collections at the Meghna and Meghna-Gumti bridges put the convoy at roughly 600 vehicles for the September 5 programme, which centred on seven demands that are yet to see the light of day.

How a long march turned into a motorcade procession also poked holes in the seriousness and sincerity of the entire undertaking.

Jamaat's own internal scandals -- a member of parliament sacked over "moral misconduct", former leaders caught up in different rackets -- has done little to win fans.

Meanwhile, after its latest long march on October 31, Jamaat expressed regret for the public inconvenience, thanking people for their patience and tolerance.

When not on the ground, Jamaat and the NCP, as observed, spend their time on social media. And it shows in their apparent short attention span on issues they hold close — but not for long.

But this is not to say the parties have offered no solutions.

Blueprints, untested yet undeterred

During a parliamentary session in September, Jamaat chief Shafiqur Rahman offered to cooperate in resolving the energy and power crisis.

“If the government wants cooperation, then we can liaise our technical expert team with the government. Together we will work for the country and the people. There is no question of credit or discredit here. Let the government take all the credit, we have no objection. We just want a solution.”

Jamaat MP Barrister Nazibur Rahman Momen also laid out four proposals: an open-access system, the formation of an emergency cell, maximum use of coal-based power and priority payment of bills.

The NCP’s reform proposals are particularly detailed on the structure of the state and the distribution of power.

The party has focused more on the fundamental reforms it submitted to the National Consensus Commission, with an emphasis on checks and balances.

But little has been done on this front beyond making public demands.

By all indications, the opposition alliance did have plans to act as a much tougher watchdog.

Soon after the election, NCP spokesperson and former interim government adviser Asif Mahmud Shojib Bhuyain said the party was preparing to form a shadow government to act as a watchdog.

By August, however, it was Jamaat that had formed a shadow government, leaving the NCP and other alliance members out of the platform.

To date, Jamaat has yet to demonstrate publicly how the arrangement is scrutinising ministries or holding ministers accountable. 

And amid all these, a rift appears. 

Frayed on the fringes?

The NCP chief was conspicuous by his absence from the Jamaat long-march rally on October 31.

Senior Joint Convener Hasnat Abdullah, Joint Conveners Ariful Islam Adeeb and Abdul Hannan Masud, and Joint Member Secretary SM Saif Mustafiz, however, were present.

Just a day earlier, NCP spokesperson Asif Mahmud, speaking about the Thakurgaon-1 by-election at an event, had said: “We have even seen the ruling party’s candidate and the opposition candidates feeding each other sweets when we are going through a very critical and dire time for democracy.”

Many interpreted this as a sign that tensions between the alliance partners had risen in recent times.

Adding to the speculation, Rashed Khan, political assistant to the Prime Minister, claimed in a Facebook post that the NCP was heading for a “peaceful divorce” from Jamaat.

Both parties have dismissed such speculation.

For now, the RMG protests and LPG price hikes have set the stage for the alliance to make its presence felt. 

At this time, it matters little whether the opposition alliance is inexperienced or that its leaders make mistakes. What matters is that the alliance has yet to turn its political mandate into a coherent, sustained system of accountability. 

Will it now drop the ball or pick up momentum?