The interim government of Bangladesh has pushed back forcefully against a recent statement by the Newspaper Owners’ Association of Bangladesh (NOAB), which raised alarm over what it described as declining press freedom and restrictions on access to information.

In a lengthy rebuttal issued Friday, Shafiqul Alam, the Press Secretary of Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus said the administration had not curtailed media freedoms and rejected what it called “misplaced” or “factually flawed” claims.

The government’s statement followed a strongly worded appeal from NOAB, whose president, A.K. Azad, on Thursday cited recent incidents including an uproar over the Dhaka-based daily Janakantha as evidence that the post–August 2024 democratic transition had failed to safeguard the rights to free expression and independent journalism.

NOAB’s statement also drew upon recent findings by Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB), which reported hundreds of cases of harassment and legal action against journalists over the past year.

In its statement, NOAB said the events of the past twelve months had fallen far short of the public’s expectations.

It cited a troubling pattern of intimidation, noting that 496 journalists were harassed between August 2024 and July 2025, with 266 named as defendants in cases linked to last year’s uprising.

Three journalists were killed in the line of duty, the group said, while at least 24 were dismissed from their jobs. NOAB added that eight newspaper editors and 11 television news chiefs had been removed from their positions in what it described as politically influenced shake-ups.

The association pointed to an incident at Janakantha, where, it claimed, organized groups had sought to force the removal of management and interfere in editorial operations.

Such disputes, it said, should be handled by labor courts or the Bangladesh Press Council, not by “mobs” creating a climate of fear.

TIB’s recent report, which NOAB cited, painted a similarly bleak picture, documenting instances of censorship, threats, and self-censorship driven by fear of reprisal from authorities or politically connected actors.

The interim administration, however, insisted it bore no responsibility for such a deterioration, arguing that the accusations misrepresented its policies and conduct.

“Since assuming office, the interim government has not interfered in the editorial, operational, or business affairs of any media outlet,” the Chief Adviser’s press wing said.

“We have exercised exceptional restraint even in the face of false and politically motivated broadcasts against us. We have not imposed censorship, suspended licenses, or filed complaints–even when provoked.”

The statement noted that several media outlets shuttered by previous governments had been allowed to resume publication or broadcasting. This, it argued, was evidence of a “hands-off approach” and a commitment to open expression.

Responding to NOAB’s concerns about access to government officials, the interim administration said journalists had been granted direct, unimpeded access to advisers and senior aides, regardless of editorial stance.

It also defended controversial reforms to the Secretariat accreditation process, saying the previous system had been “deeply compromised,” with passes issued to individuals with no journalistic credentials, including politicians and lobbyists.

The new, temporary pass system, it said, was designed to ensure that genuine journalists retained entry rights, while eliminating avenues for undue political influence.

The government added that past rules which it claimed had compelled journalists to portray official policies positively had been scrapped in favor of a more rights-compliant framework.

The administration also flatly rejected any suggestion that it had ordered or encouraged media companies to fire journalists, describing such decisions as “editorial and corporate restructuring” made by owners themselves.

It also placed some of the responsibility for journalist safety on media organizations, urging them to address wage disputes, labor rights, and unsafe working conditions.

It highlighted the work of the Media Reform Commission, which earlier this year proposed a new Journalist Protection Act aimed at reducing self-censorship and shielding reporters from intimidation by government or security forces. The legislation is under consideration.

While stressing openness to “constructive criticism,” the press wing suggested NOAB should also examine its own members’ practices, including alleged underpayment, denial of benefits, and the use of freelancers without adequate protection or equipment.

“Freedom of expression is not a slogan for us– it is a principle we uphold,” the statement said. “But misplaced or factually flawed allegations do not advance press freedom. Instead, they distract from the genuine challenges facing Bangladesh’s media landscape.”

—