When a government issues a circular, it is not merely an administrative instruction; rather, it reflects a policy position of the State. Compliance with such directives is an equal responsibility of everyone—from ordinary citizens to elected representatives, political leaders, businesspersons, and the media.

According to a report published in the Daily Ittefaq on 6 July 2026, the Government issued a circular prohibiting the use of the Prime Minister’s photograph in leaflets, banners, festoons, and similar promotional materials. The objective of this decision was to discourage the use of a constitutional office as a tool for personal or institutional publicity and to ensure equal compliance with government directives by all.

However, shortly thereafter, an incident has raised serious public concern. According to the allegation, an advertisement published in The Daily Prothom Alo on 8 July 2026 by the Shrimp Hatchery Association of Bangladesh featured a photograph of Honourable Prime Minister Tarek Rahman, with his hand raised in a greeting gesture, alongside the Association’s President and BNP Member of Parliament, Lutfur Rahman Kajal. At first glance, this appears to be inconsistent with the Government’s circular.

The question is: Was the Member of Parliament unaware of the Government’s directive? Or was the directive knowingly disregarded? Either possibility is a matter of concern.

Another important question also arises: Did one of the country’s leading national daily newspapers verify whether the advertisement complied with the Government’s directive before publishing it? While freedom to publish advertisements exists, there is an equally important responsibility to comply with the law and official government instructions.

Had such an incident involved an ordinary citizen or a small organization, would the same silence have prevailed? Or would prompt action have been taken? The fundamental principle of the rule of law is that everyone is equal before the law. Any departure from this principle undermines public confidence in the State.

Why is this issue important?

(1) It calls into question the effectiveness of Government circulars.

(2) It creates public doubt regarding the commitment of elected representatives to the rule of law.

(3) It raises questions about the professional responsibility of the media and the process of reviewing advertisements before publication.

(4) It may encourage other individuals and organizations to disregard Government directives in the future.

The responsibility of the concerned authorities is as follows:

The allegation should be examined impartially.

If a violation of the Government circular is established, explanations should be sought from the individuals, the organization concerned, and those responsible for publishing the advertisement. Appropriate administrative action should then be taken in accordance with the law.

The rule of law becomes meaningful only when it is enforced equally, without regard to an individual’s identity, political affiliation, official position, or institutional status.

In conclusion,

Government directives are not mere formalities; they constitute mandatory principles of public administration. The public expects a higher standard of responsibility from a Member of Parliament, a national organization, and a leading newspaper alike. Therefore, rather than ignoring such allegations, conducting a transparent inquiry, seeking necessary explanations, and taking lawful action are essential to strengthening public confidence in the rule of law.