Bold headline: A business figure now leads the central bank, and the politics behind the appointment is stirring fresh debate.
When the news broke on Wednesday noon that Bangladesh Bank Governor Ahsan H Mansur was being replaced by someone named Md Mostaqur Rahman, Dhaka’s newsrooms were left flickering with confusion: the information landscape suddenly looked cloudy.
Journalists wondered: Who is Mostaqur Rahman? At first, early chatter suggested a Bangladeshi economics professor teaching at a US university might be stepping into Mansur’s chair.
A quick Google search by several newsroom colleagues yielded little to nothing about the supposed professor.
Names were also misread. Banking and business reporters briefly congratulated Mostakur Rahman, a director at the Bangladesh Financial Intelligence Unit (BFIU), assuming he’d become the next governor. Several outlets even posted his name with a photo, presenting him as the incoming governor.
Only later in the afternoon did the fog lift. It turned out not to be an academic economist but Md Mostaqur Rahman, a garment exporter who runs Hera Sweaters, who would take the helm at the central bank.
The timing mattered. The change came a week after the BNP-led new government began its term following a landslide win in the February 12 election. In such a sharply polarized electoral contest, questions about fairness and rules lingered, and no obvious “dark horse” emerged.
Yet Mostaqur Rahman’s appointment appears to be more than a mere surprise pick. It has startled bankers, businesspeople, economists, and politically engaged citizens alike.
For the first time in the country’s history, a businessman has assumed the role of Bangladesh Bank governor—a seat traditionally held by economists, bureaucrats, or lifelong bankers since the central bank’s founding in 1972.
Historically, Fakhruddin Ahmed, an economist and civil servant, once led the central bank before becoming caretaker government head in 2007.
His successor, Salehuddin Ahmed, later became finance adviser to the interim government led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus. The interim administration appointed Ahsan H Mansur as central bank governor in August 2024 to address ailing banks and repair the financial sector.
To enable Mansur, then 72, to serve, the Financial Institutions Division (FID) of the Finance Ministry amended a law to raise the age limit from 67.
Mansur, formerly an IMF economist, took the reins after a political upheaval toppled the Hasina-led government and left the financial sector in disarray. His predecessor, Abdur Rouf Talukder, departed amid the upheaval as well.
Under Mansur, the banking system saw diagnoses of deep financial ills and steps to tackle distressed assets. By the moment of his departure on Wednesday, the sector’s condition had stabilized somewhat, and he had begun some long-term reforms.
Ahead of the end of the interim government’s tenure, questions circulated about whether Mansur would be allowed to continue under the new administration. His term, however, ended abruptly, in a way that drew public outcry and astonishment, as did the manner of his exit—unlike any of his predecessors.
The other side of the episode is troubling. The replacement was announced while central bank officials were protesting certain of Mansur’s actions, and he was reportedly escorted out of the building on Wednesday afternoon. As he drove away, he told reporters, “I have not resigned, nor have I been removed. I saw it in the media, so I am going home.”
That scene conflicted with the new government's stance against mob behavior, a stance that had been widely emphasized during the interim regime.
Mostaqur Rahman’s appointment has drawn questions from some legal experts who warn that it might breach conflict-of-interest rules.
The Financial Institutions Division’s own role has been a hot topic. Before and after the Finance Ministry shift, Amir Khasru Mahmud Chowdhury spoke about dissolving the FID to safeguard banking sector independence. At an event on October 27 last year, he argued the division existed to control state banks, appoint managing directors, and place favored individuals on boards to enable looting—quotes cited by Prothom Alo. He recalled that the BNP had dissolved the division during its last term, but Sheikh Hasina later reinstated it. He warned the next government might abolish it again.
Khasru underscored that genuine independence—beyond mere autonomy—must be granted to the Bangladesh Bank if reforms are to take root and discipline restored in the financial sector.
Ultimately, the FID issued a gazette notification on Wednesday afternoon confirming the new governor, bringing an abrupt end to Mansur’s term.
Some observers say the finance minister bet on a “dark horse”—a candidate with little public profile who could unexpectedly rise to the challenge and help revive the economy and streamline finances.
A dark horse can win or fail depending on whether the rules of the game are applied fairly. But in this case, what counts as a “win” is up for debate. If winning means driving down interest rates to please the business community, the new governor might be deemed successful. If, however, winning means preserving the central bank’s integrity and controlling inflation, his businessman background will be scrutinized.
The final stretch of Mansur’s tenure included a notable exchange. On February 23, he met privately with the new finance minister at the secretariat and later said he had briefed the minister on ongoing reform efforts. The following day, he had another meeting with the minister, just before his removal was announced.
Finance Minister Khasru framed the change as part of a broader administrative reshuffle to implement the new government’s priorities, noting that changes were not limited to the Bangladesh Bank.
But one burning question remains: why was Mansur removed so abruptly and publicly? Was it tied to his stance against lowering interest rates amid business pressures? Mansur had maintained a tight monetary policy to combat stubborn inflation, even as risks from elections, Ramadan, and the government pay scale changes loomed.
Bangladesh Bank’s February monetary policy kept the policy rate at 10% to address inflation risks, including ongoing government borrowing that strained the money market.
A broader comparison: in some advanced economies, central banks operate with a strong shield of independence. In the United States, for example, presidents historically avoided open clashes with the Federal Reserve’s decisions. That stance shifted under the Trump administration, which pressed for lower rates to stimulate growth, leading to a tense dynamic with then-chair Jerome Powell. Powell ultimately held his position, with the term extending into 2026, despite political pressure.
What happened in Bangladesh, however, shows a much swifter shift: a sitting governor was replaced through a rapid sequence of official notices, raising questions about governance norms and institutional autonomy in the country.
Would you view this move as a bold step toward reform, or a risky exercise that could undermine the central bank’s credibility? Do you think a businessman-turned-governor can balance growth with price stability, or should independence come from professional bankers and economists? Share your views in the comments.
