Dr Zahed Ur Rahman an Adviser to the Prime Minister
@trahmanbnp of Bangladesh was subjected to treatment by Indian immigration authorities that was unwarranted and deeply discourteous. According to accounts of the incident which was confirmed from
@ur_zahed himself, he was made to wait for nearly two hours at New Delhi airport without any clear explanation, despite travelling on a valid passport and visa.
Bangladesh High Commissioner to India
@hamidullah_riaz , accompanied by another diplomatic officer and a protocol official from the High Commission, had gone to the airport to receive Dr Zahed upon his arrival.
After disembarking, he was escorted to the immigration area and submitted his passport for entry.
What followed, however, was far from routine. After his passport was submitted, he was directed to a general waiting area and asked to wait — a wait that stretched to nearly two hours, with no explanation offered.
Throughout this period, officials of the Bangladesh High Commission, including the High Commissioner himself, remained in active contact with
@MEAIndia , working to resolve the situation.
Eventually, Indian immigration authorities informed Dr Zahed that he could proceed and enter the country. By that point, however, he had made up his mind. He declined entry and, despite repeated requests from immigration officials, refused to leave the airport.
Arrangements were subsequently made for him to return to Dhaka via Colombo.
Making a visiting dignitary of state-ministerial rank who also happens to be an Adviser to the Prime Minister, wait for hours without explanation reflects poorly on the professionalism of the process from the part of Indian immigration authorities and has understandably generated anger in Bangladesh.
Yet the incident also raises important questions that deserve clarification.
When a person of Dr. Zahed's status—effectively holding the rank of a state minister—travels abroad, even on an ordinary passport, it is standard diplomatic practice for the relevant High Commission to notify the host country's foreign ministry in advance.
Such communication is generally conveyed through a diplomatic note or formal letter outlining the visitor's status, purpose of visit and expected arrival details.
Once such a notification reaches the Ministry of External Affairs, it is typically shared with the relevant agencies, including immigration and security authorities under the Ministry of Home Affairs.
This ensures that officials at the port of entry are aware that a senior government representative is arriving and can facilitate the necessary protocol arrangements.
This leads to a straightforward but important question. Did the Bangladesh High Commission in New Delhi formally notify the Indian Ministry of External Affairs about Dr. Zahed's visit before his arrival?
If such a notification was sent and the incident still occurred, responsibility would rest squarely with the Indian side, and the treatment meted out to Dr Zahed would represent a serious diplomatic embarrassment.
If, however, the required diplomatic communication was not issued, then the matter points to a significant lapse by the
@bdhc_delhi itself. While that would not necessarily excuse the conduct of immigration officials, it would raise legitimate questions about whether proper diplomatic procedures were followed before the visit.
For that reason, Bangladesh authorities should clarify the protocol arrangements that preceded the trip. The actions of Indian immigration have already come under scrutiny. Whether there was also an avoidable procedural failure on the Bangladeshi side remains a question that merits a clear answer.