Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) has expressed deep concern that the Cabinet’s in-principle approval of the draft National Human Rights Commission Act, 2026, and the draft Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Act, 2026, has ignored fundamental observations and recommendations from stakeholders.
The organisation questioned whether the government and the ruling party have learned any lessons from the painful experiences of enforced disappearances, killings, and other brutal, multifaceted human rights violations under the fallen authoritarian regime, reads a press release.
While acknowledging some positive provisions in both draft laws, TIB said critical provisions warned to create the greatest obstacles to the Commission’s independent and effective functioning have been retained in the draft National Human Rights Commission Act, 2026.
Similarly, the approved draft of the Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Act, 2026, continues to include provisions that could facilitate impunity for members of agencies accused of involvement in the majority of such crimes during the authoritarian period, disregarding stakeholders’ views.
Weaknesses in the National Human Rights Commission Act
Speaking on the matter, TIB Executive Director Dr Iftekharuzzaman highlighted that Section 18 of the 2009 Act has been copied exactly into the new draft. This means the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) must rely on reports from the government or the heads of the respective forces in cases of human rights violations committed by law enforcement agencies—the very entities most frequently accused of involvement in such violations.
He explained that these weaknesses in the 2009 Act have historically hindered the Commission’s ability to ensure accountability and prevent violations, which is why the NHRC has never been able to obtain “A” status under international standards.
Dr Iftekharuzzaman also raised serious concerns regarding the selection committee for appointing the chairperson and commissioners, which includes the speaker, the law minister, the home minister, an MP from the ruling party, and the cabinet secretary.
Of the three other members on the committee, the government would effectively retain control over the nomination of at least two, creating a serious risk of absolute state control and dominance over NHRC appointments.
Criticising the process as patriarchal and discriminatory, Dr Iftekharuzzaman pointed out that there is no mandatory provision for women’s representation on either the five-member Commission or the selection committee.
This directly ignores civil society demands that at least two of the five commission members be women and that one be from a small ethnic group. The draft also lacks mandatory provisions for representing minorities and other disadvantaged groups on the Commission.
TIB also warned that the NHRC risks being turned into a government institution rather than an independent body.
Under the approved draft, the Commission requires prior government approval to establish offices outside Dhaka and to determine its organisational structure for staff appointments. It also allows up to 30 per cent of government employees to be appointed on deputation, and permits serving government employees to serve as Commissioners on deputation.
“Is such a Human Rights Commission what the bloody July uprising aspired to? Is it not also completely contrary to the ruling party’s 31-point programme and electoral manifesto?” Dr Iftekharuzzaman asked.
He further expressed concern over the removal of a crucial provision from the first draft, titled “Excuses for Human Rights Violations Are Unacceptable.”
Originally published as positive provision 14 on the Ministry of Law’s website, it said acting solely on the orders or instructions of a government or superior authority could not be accepted as an excuse for human rights violations.
Additionally, military detention centres have been excluded from the NHRC’s jurisdiction to regularly inspect, without prior notice, places where there is a risk of deprivation or restriction of personal liberty. “Why is that? Should we then assume that the government supports retaining Aynaghar?” asked Dr Iftekharuzzaman.
Flaws in the Enforced Disappearance Bill
Regarding the draft Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Act, Dr Iftekharuzzaman criticised placing the responsibility for investigating disappearances entirely with the police, leaving it completely outside the NHRC’s jurisdiction.
He observed that the government and bureaucracy are well aware that those accused of involvement in most enforced disappearance cases are themselves members of the disciplined forces.
He also pointed out the unrealistic nature of the proposed investigation procedure, where a junior investigating officer is required to prepare and submit an ‘interim report’ when a senior official is accused of involvement. Under the draft, if no satisfactory evidence is found against the senior official based on the junior officer’s report, a competent magistrate may order the senior official to be discharged from the proceedings.
“How realistic is it to expect such a process to remain free from undue influence? Will this provision actually help prevent and redress enforced disappearances, or will it effectively ensure impunity for the crime of enforced disappearance?” he asked.
Furthermore, TIB noted that the draft fails to include the involvement of elected representatives, ministers, or other important state officials in its definition of enforced disappearance, falling short of international conventions and Bangladesh’s actual experience.
Key monitoring functions from the Enforced Disappearances Prevention and Redress Ordinance, 2025—such as monitoring compliance with detention safeguards, conducting on-site inspections of prisons and detention facilities, and inspecting premises to identify secret detention centres—have also been omitted.
Call for immediate revision
Pointing out that a significant portion of the people of Bangladesh, including members of both ruling and opposition parties, have fallen victim to the horrific situation created by the historical lack of legal safeguards and an independent human rights body, TIB urged immediate revisions before the drafts are placed before Parliament.
The organisation strongly demanded that the two draft laws be revised to reflect the views of victims and stakeholders, aligning with the spirit of the July uprising, state reform aspirations based on human rights and justice, as well as the ruling party’s own electoral and 31-point commitments.
