The United Nations Human Rights Office will establish a dedicated mission in Bangladesh following its investigation into the deadly crackdowns on mass protests during the previous regime, a move that has sparked fresh debate over sovereignty, accountability, and Bangladesh’s international image.
The mission stems directly from the UN’s fact-finding report on the violent suppression of opposition-led protests in July 2024, which documented serious abuses, including the use of excessive force against unarmed demonstrators and widespread violations of civil liberties.
The decision was formalised this week in Geneva through a three-year memorandum of understanding signed between UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk and Bangladesh’s Foreign Secretary Asad Alam Siam.
Türk visited Dhaka from October 26–30, 2024.
The primary goal was to evaluate and respond to serious human rights concerns after political unrest, engage with victims and stakeholders, and promote justice, democratic renewal, and accountability. He met with Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus, government officials, civil society members and student leaders who led a mass upsurge toppling Sheikh Hasina government.
Later in a report published on February 12, 2025, the UN Human Rights Office said that Bangladesh’s former government and security and intelligence services, alongside violent elements associated with the Awami League party, systematically engaged in a range of serious human rights violations during last year’s student-led protests.
Drawing on testimony of senior officials and other evidence, it also found an official policy to attack and violently repress anti-government protesters and sympathisers, raising concerns as to crimes against humanity requiring urgent further criminal investigation.
Based on deaths reported by various credible sources, the report estimates that as many as 1,400 people may have been killed between 15 July and 5 August, and thousands were injured, the vast majority of whom were shot by Bangladesh’s security forces. Of these, the report indicates that as many as 12-13 percent of those killed were children. Bangladesh Police reported that 44 of its officers were killed.
Now the establishment of a UN Human Rights Office mission in Bangladesh marks a significant moment both for the country’s evolving political landscape and for its international positioning.
Such missions are rare; currently, only 16 countries host them, typically in contexts where human rights reforms are fragile, contested or in transition.
This context alone explains why the decision has generated debate, particularly among those who argue that Bangladesh, as a sovereign state with its own constitutional mechanisms, should not require external oversight of this nature.
The primary function of this mission will be to assist Bangladesh in strengthening its human rights frameworks through technical advice, capacity-building, and closer engagement with civil society.
It is not designed as an interventionist body but rather as a supportive mechanism to help ensure compliance with international obligations and to implement recommendations from past UN investigations, particularly those arising from inquiries into the July 2024 repression.
For Bangladesh, the potential benefits are clear. Internationally, it signals that the current administration is open to transparency and accountability and is willing to work with the global community to uphold human rights principles during a politically sensitive period of transition.
This may improve Bangladesh’s standing with Western nations, multilateral donours, and rights-based organisations, and could ease pressure from international sanctions or negative diplomatic fallout.
Domestically, it opens the door for more structured reforms of law enforcement, judicial processes, and civic space, areas where Bangladesh’s record has been increasingly criticised.
However, there are risks.
For a government that is already facing suspicion from segments of the population for perceived compromises on sovereignty, hosting such an office may deepen internal political divides.
Opponents may use it to argue that Bangladesh is being placed in the same category as post-conflict or authoritarian regimes that required similar UN oversight. Moreover, the presence of the Office could bring increased scrutiny to areas that the government might prefer to reform quietly or at its own pace, creating tensions between domestic priorities and international expectations.
The UN Human Rights Office’s country missions have historically been deployed in states grappling with systemic abuses, political violence, or fragile transitions.
In Colombia, Tunisia and Kyrgyzstan, these offices have provided support for transitional justice, police reforms, judicial accountability and the protection of civil rights.
In some cases, they have become crucial mediators between governments and civil society. Yet these missions often come with political sensitivities; governments frequently resist them as infringements on sovereignty, while rights groups welcome them as safeguards against impunity.
In Bangladesh, civil society and human rights defenders have cautiously welcomed the mission, seeing it as a long-overdue mechanism for monitoring accountability and preventing future abuses. They argue that without international oversight, past patterns of repression could easily repeat.
Another issue that is being debated concerns the provision of immunity for local officials even after their retirement.
According to the memorandum of understanding signed between the two sides, officials at the UN Human Rights Commission’s mission in Dhaka are to be granted immunity similar to that of diplomats at other diplomatic missions. It has been stated that officials working at the UN Human Rights Mission will be exempt from legal proceedings for all acts performed in their official capacity.
This immunity includes protection from arrest or detention and exemption from the seizure of their personal or official belongings. Locally recruited staff employed on a permanent basis will also enjoy these privileges. Moreover, this immunity will remain in effect even after their work with the United Nations has ended.
Some have raised questions, noting that there has been no precedent of granting such immunity to local citizens after their work with the United Nations has concluded. They are questioning why a provision has been included to extend immunity even after retirement.
For Bangladesh, however, the challenge will be to treat this mission not as an imposition but as an opportunity to shape its post-crisis narrative, strengthen institutions, and build trust at home and abroad. If managed constructively, it can serve as a tool for long-term stability and global credibility. If handled defensively, it risks becoming another point of contention in an already polarised political climate.