Khabor Wala Desk
Published: 26th February 2026, 4:39 AM
The Governor of the country’s central bank has resigned unexpectedly, following a period of internal unrest that has been described as one of the most turbulent episodes in the institution’s recent history. After a day of mounting tensions at the bank’s headquarters, his contract-based appointment was terminated, triggering widespread debate among economists, policymakers, and financial observers.
The unrest began in mid-February. On 16 February, the central bank’s Officers’ Welfare Council held a press conference sharply criticising an emergency board meeting called by the Governor. According to the council, the meeting—which took place on the eve of the newly elected government’s inauguration—was poorly timed and contrary to administrative norms.
A central point of concern was the discussion of key policy issues, including licensing for digital banks. Council leaders argued that the meeting was ill-timed and lacked institutional consensus. Although the meeting concluded without any formal decisions, relations between the Governor and senior officials rapidly deteriorated.
On 23 February, the Governor issued show-cause notices to three council leaders, instructing them to respond within ten days. The following day, the officers were transferred out of the capital, a move widely perceived by staff as punitive. Dissatisfaction spread quickly among employees, many of whom regarded the transfers as an overreach of authority.
The following Wednesday, officers and staff from various departments gathered at the central bank headquarters in Motijheel to protest, demanding the withdrawal of the show-cause notices and transfers, and ultimately calling for the Governor’s resignation. There were warnings of a potential complete work stoppage. Police were deployed to maintain order amid escalating tensions.
During an emergency press conference, the Governor defended his actions, asserting that certain officers were disseminating incorrect information, particularly regarding bank consolidation policies. He urged all staff to adhere to institutional service principles and warned of disciplinary measures for protocol violations.
Within hours, the Governor’s contract-based appointment was revoked, and he departed the bank under security escort. On the same day, one of his contract advisors resigned. Subsequently, the central bank announced the reassignment of five senior officials, including the Private Secretary and the Director of Policy Coordination.
| Date | Event | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 16 February | Emergency board meeting publicly criticised | Meeting concluded without formal decisions |
| 23 February | Show-cause notices issued to three council leaders | Ten-day response deadline |
| 24 February | Three officers transferred outside the capital | Staff unrest intensified |
| Following Wednesday | Protest at headquarters | Governor’s appointment terminated |
| Same day | Reassignment of five officials | Administrative restructuring initiated |
Observers have described the incident as a cautionary tale on the delicate balance between administrative authority and institutional unity. Economic analysts stress that safeguarding the central bank’s independence, operational stability, and policy transparency is essential for restoring market confidence.
Amid a politically sensitive period, attention now turns to the central bank’s ability to restore internal cohesion and reassure markets. The episode has underscored the critical importance of inclusive governance and measured, consensus-driven decision-making.
Comments