The Bangladesh Police Service Association has defended Inspector General of Police (IGP) Ali Hossain Fakir’s controversial remarks about ‘crossfire’, describing them as a timely call for the firm enforcement of existing laws and regulations.

In a statement issued on Tuesday (October 27), the professional organisation of police cadre officers said the IGP’s remarks should be understood in the context of maintaining public safety, combating crime and strengthening the police force’s capacity to perform its duties.

The statement was signed by the association’s General Secretary, Dhaka District Superintendent of Police Shamima Parveen.

The association said police officers had been facing various challenges in enforcing the law amid the country’s changing law and order situation, the rise of mob culture and the circumstances following August 5.

According to the statement, the IGP’s remarks were intended to emphasise the need for appropriate action within the limits of the law and to strengthen officers’ professional confidence and ability to carry out their responsibilities.

The association warned that viewing strict law enforcement negatively while also criticising police for inaction could create uncertainty among officers working in the field.

It added that hesitation in exercising lawful powers to combat crime could embolden criminals and undermine law and order as well as the functioning of the state.

The organisation also stressed that police operations must comply with the Constitution and existing laws, while upholding human rights, constitutional protections and accountability.

Notably, the statement did not directly use the term ‘crossfire’, which has frequently been associated with alleged extrajudicial killings in Bangladesh.

Speaking at an event in Dhaka’s Chawkbazar on Monday, IGP Ali Hossain Fakir said police would not hesitate to carry out ‘crossfire’ where necessary if authorised by the government.

He also expressed frustration over criticism of police conduct by journalists, saying officers were labelled authoritarian when they used force and weak when they remained passive. He called for a suitable working environment and greater empowerment for the police.

The remarks prompted criticism from political parties and various organisations, reigniting debate over the limits of police powers, the use of lethal force and accountability.

Police Headquarters subsequently clarified that the IGP had used the term to convey firmness in law enforcement, not to endorse extrajudicial killings or punishment outside the judicial process.

The controversy has also raised questions about the legal limits of the use of force.

While the law recognises the right to self-defence under specific circumstances, that right is subject to legal conditions and does not authorise punishment without due process.

The Police Service Association maintained that firm, impartial and professional enforcement of the law, combined with respect for human rights, was essential to strengthening public confidence in the police.

Sources: bdnews24.com, The Daily Star.