Analysis, Bangladesh, Current Affairs, Journalism, Review

Guilty before Trial: A Dissection of Al Jazeera’s “36 Days in July”

Iconus Clustus 27 July 2025

Al Jazeera’s “36 Days in July” is not journalism—it is a selectively sourced, politically motivated character assassination. By platforming figures tied to extremist groups and omitting critical legal and historical context, it weaponizes leaked audio to vilify Sheikh Hasina and legitimize a coup born of coordinated violence.

27 July 2025

1: The Spectacle Disguised as Journalism Al Jazeera’s “HASINA – 36 Days in July” is marketed as an investigative documentary. In truth, it functions as a media indictment. From framing to narration, from sourcing to visual mood-setting, the entire feature seems less interested in investigating the truth than in delivering a preordained verdict: Sheikh Hasina is guilty. Al Jazeera and the BBC, in their respective pieces, center their accusations on a short leaked audio clip — barely 80 seconds long — which they treat as a smoking gun. For the sake of brevity, this article will only focus on Al Jazeera Documentary. This audio captures a voice that has allegedly been attributed to the former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, issuing directives in the midst of a violent uprising. The audio, at the time of publishing, is neither forensically authenticated nor interpreted with journalistic caution. Worse, its use is framed within a montage of insinuations, selective voices, and emotionally charged imagery,

producing what can only be described as trial-by-media. Yet the words themselves offer no blanket order for violence, let alone student killings. The central "evidence" of this so-called investigation — the short leaked audio clip — that this documentary and the BBC feature appeared within days of each other, using the same core audio material and overlapping narrative structure, raises serious questions about coordination — if not lobbying. It is not implausible to suspect that this is not independent journalism but a synchronized narrative push, especially considering the actors it platformed and the timing with an ongoing legal trial. 2: The So-Called Smoking Gun – A Short Audio, A Long Stretch In the audio materials, the individual in question can be heard stating: “I have told them — if necessary, shoot… Students’ lives must be saved… But if anyone creates terror, if there’s no other way — you must act.” The voice in the audio reveals a response to a…

Bangladesh, Dr Yunus, Journalism, Liberation War, Politics, Secularism

Shahriar Kabir’s Pen Refused to Bow

Sherlock Holmes 22 April 2025

The Yunus regime stands condemned for unjustly imprisoning freedom fighter Shahriar Kabir, a steadfast symbol of secularism, on baseless charges. He is enduring torture behind bars and being denied critical medical care after experiencing a cardiac arrest. His plight underscores the blatant cruelty of this unconstitutional government, which serves the interests of war criminals and extremist leaders.

22 April 2025

It has been more than seven months1 since Shahriar Kabir, an eminent writer, journalist, filmmaker and intellectual of Bangladesh, was arrested by the unconstitutional interim Government2 led by Dr. Muhammad Yunus on false allegations. Unlike him, during this despicable Yunus regime, many journalists, writers and political-cultural activists are either behind bars, indicted on false accusations or flying the coop3. In the last seven months of 75-year-old Shahriar Kabir's imprisonment, he, who cannot move without a wheelchair, has faced grim conditions as Yunus's phoney Government shows a complete lack of rule of law, resembling the law of the jungle. Futility in case filing, multiple impertinent remands, hare-brained judicial process, and naked violation of the Prisons Act of Bangladesh are pointed out. Significantly, the Yunus Government is going ape to hinder the basic treatment process of Shahriar Kabir, which is considered a fundamental responsibility of the state according to the de jure constitution of Bangladesh. Even after the second cardiac arrest of

Shahriar Kabir in jail4, the Yunus Government fiddled with the treatment. The corporate media has not reported, editorialised, post-editorialised, or discussed Shahriar Kabir's sufferings in newspapers or on talk shows, and there is no patina of so-called intellectuals' or human rights organisations' statements. Only social media activists, secular bloggers, and a single news portal, BD Digest, have broken Yunus's iron curtain against the media5 to crack the news and are up in arms about the megalomaniac Yunus administration. Shahriar Kabir, a freedom fighter in Bangladesh's Liberation War in 1971, dedicated his life to promoting and preserving the spirit of Bangladesh's liberation movement. He has been dry behind his ears for five decades of Bengali children's literature6. Being a nonpareil storyteller, his hearkening back to the wartime memoir and the bedrock of 1971 and writing in pellucid prose for young minds becomes the panacea for all communal and compromised ills. In his novels and short stories written for children, the fastidious…

Journalism, Politics, Review

Investigating Al Jazeera’s ‘investigation’: an open letter to David Bergman

Rayhan Rashid 19 February 2021

Every country, not just Bangladesh, needs a space for introspection on certain fundamental matters. These are, for example, power (and its abuse), influence (and its peddling), civil liberties (and its suppression), privacy (and surveillance), probity, integrity, transparency etc. While conscientious journalism serves as a catalyst for advancement, careless ones hinder it, as the latter kind diverts the very agenda of discourse that the media is supposed to engender.

19 February 2021

In a Facebook post (Feb 4), my brief take on the much talked about Al Jazeera documentary ("All the Prime Minister's Men") was: "It is something that could have been part of an important conversation, but merely ended up being a cheap sensationalisation of some majorly unsubstantiated claims based on heaps of unrelated information, false insinuations, and deliberately omitted contexts." (Link) You wrote to me, asking what I meant by that. Since this relates to a matter that is now subject of public debate, I thought it would make sense to respond in a public thread. I hope you would not object to such a public nature of engagement. First of all, thank you for your willingness to discuss the AJ piece. I hope this will shed some light on some of the whats, whys, and hows of the documentary that many like me are curious about. I have noted your assessment of the documentary in an interview (Link) where

you attested the claims made in the programme as "well substantiated." So, I decided to watch the documentary for a second time just to be sure that we are referring to the same work, and found myself in agreement with you regarding its "sleek production quality" at least. It indeed gives the feel of watching a "thriller", as you rightly described. With regard to its content, however, I wish I could share your glowing verdict. Regrettably, the artistic liberty the makers took so abundantly in its treatment of "facts/evidence", did not quite make up for the journalistic rigour which the documentary generally lacked. Before elaborating why I found this documentary unsubstantiated, let me make a few things clear. I believe, every country, not just Bangladesh, needs a space for introspection on certain fundamental matters. These are, for example, power (and its abuse), influence (and its peddling), civil liberties (and its suppression), privacy (and surveillance), probity, integrity, transparency etc. While conscientious…