The Governor of the nation’s central bank has stepped down following an extraordinary episode of internal unrest, marking one of the most turbulent chapters in the institution’s recent history. A day of mounting tension at the bank’s headquarters culminated in the cancellation of his contractual appointment, triggering fresh debate within financial and policy-making circles.
The controversy began in mid-February. On 16 February, the Central Bank Officers’ Welfare Council convened a press briefing to criticise an emergency board meeting called by the Governor. According to council representatives, the timing of the meeting—on the eve of the newly elected government’s swearing-in ceremony—was inappropriate and contrary to established administrative norms.
Particular concern centred on the proposed discussion of key policy matters, including the licensing of digital banks. Council leaders described the initiative as ill-timed and lacking institutional consensus. Although the meeting concluded without any formal resolutions, relations between the Governor and segments of the bank’s senior staff deteriorated rapidly.
On 23 February, the Governor issued show-cause notices to three council leaders for organising the press conference, directing them to respond within ten days. The following day, the officials were reassigned to offices outside the capital. The transfers further inflamed dissatisfaction among employees, many of whom interpreted the moves as punitive.
By Wednesday morning, officers and staff from multiple departments had gathered at the central bank’s headquarters in Motijheel, demanding the withdrawal of both the show-cause notices and the transfer orders. Protesters also called for the Governor’s resignation, warning of a full work stoppage if their demands were not met. As tensions escalated, additional police were deployed around the building to maintain order.
In an emergency press conference, the Governor defended his actions, asserting that certain officials were spreading misleading information—particularly regarding bank consolidation initiatives. He emphasised that all employees were bound by institutional service rules and warned that disciplinary measures would follow any breach of protocol.
Within hours, however, confirmation emerged that his contractual appointment had been revoked. He departed the premises under heightened security. A contractual adviser to the Governor also relinquished his position the same day. Subsequently, the central bank announced a reshuffle affecting five officials, including a personal secretary and a director involved in policy coordination.
Timeline of Key Events
| Date | Event | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 16 February | Emergency board meeting criticised publicly | Meeting ended without formal decision |
| 23 February | Show-cause notices issued to three council leaders | Ten-day response deadline set |
| 24 February | Three officials transferred outside the capital | Staff dissatisfaction intensified |
| Wednesday | Protest at headquarters | Governor’s appointment cancelled |
| Same day | Reassignment of five officials | Administrative restructuring initiated |
Observers view the episode as a stark reminder of the delicate balance required between administrative authority and institutional cohesion, particularly during periods of political transition. Financial analysts stress that maintaining central bank independence, operational stability, and policy transparency will be crucial in restoring confidence.
As the country navigates a sensitive political moment, attention now turns to how swiftly the central bank can re-establish internal unity and reassure markets. The unfolding developments underscore the importance of inclusive governance and measured decision-making in safeguarding financial stability.