Published : 07 Nov 2026, 02:15 AM
Updated : 07 Nov 2026, 02:15 AM
The NCP, a political party founded on the aspirations of the 2024 mass uprising, seems to have deviated from its original goal and become a typical part of the political machine, according to Samanta Shermeen, who recently resigned from the party.
In an exclusive interview with bdnews24.com the day after announcing her resignation, she brought up explosive allegations of “lack of internal democracy”, “marginalisation” of women and “ideological drift” within the party.
Samanta said she did not leave the NCP on a whim, saying that, while there was pressure from within the party to resign, various external groups were also pressuring her to do so.
Despite this, she says she tried to “represent her position” from within the party for almost a year. But, in the end, she resigned because “there was no effective forum” to change the party's decisions.
Samanta said, "I have never been in favour of resigning and leaving the party. But I feel that whatever ability, capability, and strength I had to actually pull this party off that course has been exhausted."
She said she has yet to take a decision on forming a new political party, but wants to decide on her next political role after discussions with various political parties, platforms and individuals over the next two to three months.
'Not a Happy Feeling'
Speaking of her resignation, Samanta said that the decision was not a happy one for her as she was involved in the process of forming the NCP from the start. Before the party was founded, she served as the spokesperson of the civic committee.
In her words, the civic committee was the foundation of the NCP. If that history is removed, it would also weaken the foundation of the party's existence.
"No one wants to leave the party they built with their own hands. It is truly not a happy feeling for me. Plus, the NCP has given me a lot."
However, Samanta said that she had to face political and organisational disputes for a long time before deciding to resign.
Samanta's disagreement with the party was clear from the time the NCP allied with Jamaat-e-Islami before the last elections. So why did it take so long to decide to resign?
Samanta said that as long as she had a political understanding and the ability to use logic, she had tried to divert the party from the wrong path. She believed that resignation was not a solution. When leaders and activists at various levels of the party also considered resigning, she discouraged them.
However, she says that after the party was restructured, there was no forum left to express dissent.
“Now that there is no forum, where will I actually fight?”
Samanta said that previously she had the opportunity to express her views in the party’s general meeting and executive committee meetings. She also discussed matters with the political council. But the party no longer considered the objections she raised to be problems.
She also expressed doubts about when general meetings would now be held, or whether they would be held at all.
‘On What Basis Did He Become the Convenor?’
Criticising the NCP’s organisational restructuring, Samanta said she was one of many who saw their organisational power cut down over time. At the same time, the criteria for determining the qualifications of those who had received new, important posts had not been disclosed.
She said that the party should clarify what qualifications were required to appoint a person to a post, but no such public criteria had been followed in assigning responsibilities in the NCP. The political council has distributed the positions “at its own discretion”, she said.
“When you assign a responsibility to someone, when you appoint someone, then the criteria for that should be public criteria. ... But no such criteria have been made public by the party.”
Samanta questioned why major changes were made to the convening committee before the council was to be held, saying: “Everything has been changed from top to bottom. On what basis has it been changed? There is no accountability.”
She claimed that 160 people had been appointed to the 196-member committee, but the process of allocating posts was not done in a transparent manner.
“You see, my joint convenor post - why am I a joint convenor? I could have been a member as well. On what basis was I given the joint convenor post? Why was I not made a member?
“My argument is this - why was I not given a senior post? I want to argue - why was I not given a junior post? You can ask such questions about all these posts. The one who became the convenor – on what basis did he become the convenor? Based on what criteria did he become the convenor? He was not elected.”
‘NCP has Realigned with Old Political Trends’
When asked whether the NCP, which emerged from the Anti-discrimination Student Movement, had moved away from its goal of changing the old political paradigm, Samanta said that the party had finally succumbed to the existing political trends.
In this context, she compared the NCP’s position on the caretaker government system with the party’s internal decision-making process.
According to Samanta, the NCP had proposed to include the opinion of the opposition party in the selection of the caretaker government’s chief advisor and advisory council during the National Consensus Commission talks. That is why a forum of seven or eight members was discussed, where the opposition party was allowed representation.
She said, “Democracy cannot be established with like-minded people, democracy has to be established with the opposition.”
But she alleged that the same attitude towards the opposition was not seen during the restructuring of the committee within the party.
According to Samanta, despite talking about including the opposition's views in important decision-making at the state level, the NCP had ignored dissent within its own party.
"The NCP's proposals for the state are one thing, but its proposals are different within its own party."
She fears that the party may show similar inconsistency in giving space to opposition views if it gets the opportunity to govern the state in the future.
‘There Was Pressure to Force Consensus’
Asked whether the NCP leadership had become one-sided, Samanta said that it would be a simplification to see the issue as a problem of leadership by just one person. Rather, in her opinion, a certain political ideology had emerged within the party.
She said that in the last phase of the party, she and Nahida Sarwer had taken stands against the political strain of Convenor Nahid Islam. But gradually, others in the party were forced to “agree”.
"There is a huge pressure within the party to agree, to be forced to agree."
Samanta, who has stepped down as the joint convenor of the NCP, says that she had openly expressed her disagreements on an alliance and the party's political policy.
She even opposed the statement of an NCP MP in parliament on setting up a party office in every Upazila. The party leadership “did not take these objections lightly”, she said.
According to Samanta, due to the practice of secret ballots and informal understandings in the distribution of responsibilities, leaders and activists did not want to express their differences before their positions were confirmed.
Voices of Women Leaders 'Ignored'
Samanta also raised questions about the participation and leadership opportunities of women in NCP's political decision-making.
She alleged that although women were at the forefront of the 2024 mass uprising, their opinions did not receive due importance in political leadership and important decision-making afterwards.
Samanta said that at the time of the decision to form an alliance, there were 10 members in the party's political council. Three of them were women - Tasnim Jara, Nahida and herself. The remaining seven were men.
Samanta claims that all three women members opposed the decision to ally, but their objections were not considered as representing the views of a larger section of women.
“When we three women disagree on the same issue, our words were not considered in the sense that it could have been representative of women, of a large section of society, the voice of 50 percent of the people.”
She said that these actions did not match the NCP's declared position. Later, these three leaders were told that they were not in the forum as women, but rather, they were appointed for their own capacity.
Samanta believes that the question of women's political representation had been “avoided” through this argument.
She said, “It is a patriarchal decision. It has become women versus men and our voices are not being considered as women.”
Objections to an Alliance with Jamaat
When asked whether she had become isolated due to her opposition to the NCP’s alliance with Jamaat, Samanta explained that framing her objection merely as opposition to an alliance with Jamaat would be an incomplete interpretation.
She argues that a new political party should not form an alliance with an established, non-reformist party, as doing so restricts the new party’s ability to pursue the politics of reform.
“A new party cannot align itself with an established party that already possesses a rigid, pre-existing structure.
“If it does, the new party can no longer effectively challenge the old system or the old party’s regressive practices. It effectively loses the capacity to engage in reformist politics.”
She alleges that taking this stance led to significant pressure from within the party. In different meetings, the number of people willing to speak in her favour dwindled.
During a general meeting, a proposal she supported, of opposing the restructuring of a committee, was defeated by a vote of 71 to 15. She claims that even securing those 15 votes drew further discontent from others.
“I was asked, ‘Will you stop, or should we expel you?’ – things like that were said to me.”
However, for Samanta, the greater disappointment beyond becoming isolated was the inability to shift the party’s course, despite the immense pressure she faced.
Jamaat’s ‘Religious Fascism’
Samanta said she does not view Jamaat as an entity that upholds the politics of reform.
In her view, to understand the true political identity of any party, one must examine its constitution, manifesto, and action.
Simply participating in the electoral process does not qualify a party as a proponent of a democratic political agenda, she said.
“Based on their political project, constitution, and manifesto, their objective is to establish a form of religious rule. Consequently, you will not find any clear explanation from Jamaat to this day regarding how they perceive democracy.
“Furthermore, Jamaat cannot provide any criteria for how individuals from various sectors of Bangladeshi society might actually join such an organisation.”
The former NCP leader added, “Ultimately, their vision for the state is one of religious fascism – seizing power through a form of social fascism. Their involvement in the democratic process is not a reflection of their true character, it is merely a posture they adopt from time to time.
“They have taken various, issue-based stances over the years – they maintained good relations with the British, later supported Pakistan, and subsequently opposed the partition of Pakistan when Bangladesh emerged as an independent nation.”
Samanta notes, “These are survival tactics. However, if you examine their constitution and manifesto, it becomes clear that what they truly seek is a religious, monolithic state.”
Nevertheless, she disagrees with those who label the NCP as Jamaat’s “B-team”.
In her view, labelling political parties in this manner, without analysing their actual positions and ideologies, only serves to weaken political discourse.
She stressed the need for a reasoned analysis of the similarities and differences between the NCP and Jamaat.
No Hope for a Return to NCP
When asked whether she would return to the NCP, provided the party reconsidered its alliance with Jamaat and ensured internal democracy and women’s leadership, Samanta said the party was the result of her long-standing hard work and she had never wanted to leave.
However, she believes that once political parties become embedded within the existing political system, it is difficult for them to break free from it.
“There is no such example in Bangladesh, nor have I seen one anywhere else in the world, where a party, having once functioned within an established system, later turned revolutionary and went on to completely dismantle that very system.”
As such, she currently sees no prospect of the NCP returning to its former position. Nevertheless, she offers her “best wishes” to the party.
No Decision Yet on Forming a New Party
The former NCP leader has yet to decide whether she will form a new political party after leaving the NCP.
Samanta said part of her agenda is to pressure existing parties to reform and adopt a new approach to politics, with public pressure being the most effective tool.
She emphasised the need to reform political parties and transform the colonial-era political structure.
Over the next two to three months, Samanta plans to hold discussions with both new and established political parties, platforms and individuals. She also remains open to talks with the NCP.
Highlighting that she will determine her future political role based on how the situation unfolds, she added: “I am not one to make impulsive decisions, just as my decision to resign was not a hasty one.”
