Bangladesh Awami League's response to the Report Published by the OHCHR on the Events of July-August in Bangladesh

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) released a report in July-August regarding the killings and human rights violations that took place in Bangladesh. The Awami League believes that the report is entirely biased, one-sided, and based on fabricated information. It claims that the OHCHR issued this shamefully biased report as a political assignment for an unlawful and unconstitutional militant group, completely lacking in neutrality, objectivity, and professionalism.

The OHCHR’s depiction of the events from July-August in their report is entirely false. In fact, the narrative presented by the OHCHR reflects the viewpoints of domestic and foreign groups involved in a conspiracy aimed at undermining constitutional and democratic governance in Bangladesh during that period. Recently, the issue of this conspiracy was openly discussed in the United States and international media, as well as at the White House, where President Donald Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi referred to these events in Bangladesh. Furthermore, President Trump’s recent statements also addressed the matter of conspiracy regarding Bangladesh.

The true context of these events is that the student protests were related to the reform of the quota system for government jobs. In response to their demands, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina abolished the quota system in 2018. The students welcomed this decision. Up until June 2024, no issues had arisen regarding this matter. However, in June 2024, following a case filed by the children of some freedom fighters challenging the government's 2018 decision to abolish the quota system, the High Court ruled in favor of reinstating the quota. In response, the government, considering the expectations of the students, decided to maintain the 2018 abolition of the quota system. Following the Prime Minister's instructions, the government appealed to the Supreme Court’s Appellate Division to challenge the High Court’s ruling.

In addition, the government immediately requested the Appellate Division to stay the execution of the High Court’s ruling to prevent any complications. The Appellate Division stayed the High Court’s ruling, thus the quota system was once again abolished. As a result, students or job seekers did not face any harm or problems. The government communicated to the students that, as the matter was still pending in court, the final decision would be made by the Supreme Court. The government would stand in support of the students’ interests in the court. The government’s decision and the students' expectations were aligned.

A self-serving group created instability in the country with the malicious intent of undermining the democratic system, carrying out terrorist attacks on several educational institutions, including Dhaka University. Later, they targeted several state establishments in Dhaka, causing significant state damage. In a planned attempt to create chaos and instability, several students were killed by assassins amid the protests with the goal of overthrowing the government. Such conspiratorial events aimed at overthrowing governments are something we have witnessed in various countries around the world.

In this context, on July 17, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, in her speech to the nation, addressed the students' demands and stated that since the matter was under judicial review in the highest court, the Supreme Court would give the final decision. She reassured the students by saying that they would not be disappointed and that the government would stand by them. Following several tragic deaths, the Prime Minister formed a high-level judicial investigation committee, led by a Supreme Court judge, to conduct a fair investigation and bring the culprits to justice. She also announced support for the affected families.

As per the students' expectations, the government made a special request to expedite the hearing of the quota case. Upon the Attorney General's special request, student representatives were made parties in the case. On July 21, the Supreme Court annulled the High Court's earlier ruling and gave its final verdict. The students' expectations regarding the quota reform were upheld in the highest court's decision. The Prime Minister, expressing condolences to the families of those killed in the violent incidents, announced a donation of 10 lakh taka to each affected family. She arranged for advanced medical treatment for all the injured, including students, at various specialized hospitals such as CMH. The Prime Minister personally visited the hospitals to see the injured and provided financial assistance to each of them with her own hands.

Despite all these efforts, the terrorists from the BNP-Jamaat alliance primarily carried out terrorist attacks on various state establishments in Dhaka, causing widespread destruction. The killings that occurred in July and August were premeditated. These incidents were orchestrated with the goal of creating anger, dissatisfaction, and instability in order to overthrow the government. Why would the government, while in power, carry out such killings? Who benefits from these killings, and who suffers as a result?

OHCHR has blatantly written in its report as part of the illegal and unconstitutional interim government's political agenda, stating, "Alongside the student protests, the fragility of the governance system, corruption, and the public's frustration with economic, social, and cultural rights led thousands of people, including women and children, to join the protests. The students and the public demanded meaningful social, economic, and political reforms."

With this statement, OHCHR has disrespected the decisions of its parent organization, the United Nations. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Bangladesh made significant progress in socio-economic and cultural development, propelling the country to the forefront of the developing world. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were achieved well before the designated deadline during Sheikh Hasina's tenure. This achievement was widely praised by the UN and other international organizations. Under her leadership, Bangladesh transitioned from a least-developed country to a developing one. In terms of progress toward the SDGs, Bangladesh was ranked first in the developing world. For its remarkable success in poverty reduction and development, Bangladesh has been recognized as a development role model by the UN, World Bank, and other international institutions. It is Sheikh Hasina's leadership in the socio-economic and cultural development of Bangladesh over the past decade and a half that has earned the country this recognition. Therefore, OHCHR’s statement is proven to be false and politically motivated.

OHCHR has mentioned in their report that the terms of reference for their fact-finding mission on the events of July and August were prepared in consultation with the Bangladesh government, and the time frame for this investigation was from July 1 to August 15, 2024.

In its report, OHCHR has shamelessly spread falsehoods. It claims that until August 5, 2024, the Awami League government had not taken any steps to investigate or ensure accountability for serious human rights violations committed by security forces or Awami League supporters. This statement is entirely false. On July 17, in a speech to the nation, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina announced the formation of a high-level judicial committee led by a Supreme Court judge to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into all murders and terrorist attacks and bring the responsible individuals to justice. This judicial committee had begun its work. However, after August 5, the illegal and unconstitutional interim government dissolved this committee.

Additionally, the Prime Minister had directed the law enforcement agencies to ensure that no lives were lost while addressing the protests and violence. To achieve this, she specifically instructed the security forces to use only non-lethal weapons. Since the last week of July, she had suspended all protest rallies and gatherings of the Awami League to avoid any risk of clashes and unrest. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina could have organized massive gatherings of millions of Awami League leaders and activists in Dhaka, tipping the situation in favor of the government. However, this could have led to potential loss of life. Furthermore, she could have declared a state of emergency and used full force to maintain power. However, keeping in mind the safety of the common people's lives and the need to prevent any casualties, she took every possible measure to ensure peace. 

The OHCHR report blatantly states that after August 5th, the government took measures to ensure accountability for human rights violations and abuses. However, since August 5th, the way police officers and Awami League leaders and activists were killed across the country—acts that would be classified as genocide under international law—no steps were taken by the illegal, unconstitutional interim government to investigate these killings or other terrorist attacks. OHCHR, as a human rights body under the United Nations, has shown no concern for human rights and humanity in this regard.

The mass killings, including the police killings and attacks on the homes of Awami League leaders, activists, and minority communities, that occurred after August 5th, are no less severe than the atrocities committed by Pakistani forces during the 1971 Liberation War. In the second part of the report, OHCHR briefly mentions the widespread killings of Awami League leaders, activists, and supporters across the country, which specifically targeted police officers and Awami League members. These merciless killings, according to international law, constitute genocide and crimes against humanity.

The illegal, terrorist interim government has not taken any action to arrest or prosecute the perpetrators of these genocides, crimes against humanity, and terrorist activities. OHCHR, by referring to these killings as "retaliatory violence" or "revenge violence," attempts to give legitimacy to these acts. Moreover, the report's recommendations section takes a contradictory stance, providing superficial suggestions for prosecuting these crimes. It appears as though the police officers and Awami League members have no human rights. OHCHR's discriminatory position directly violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966).

The BNP-Jamaat terrorists carried out attacks on 450 police stations across the country, brutally killing hundreds of police officers. Even pregnant police officers were victims of this violence. Thousands of Awami League leaders, activists, and supporters were indiscriminately murdered across the country. These murders, which are clearly acts of genocide, have not been attributed to anyone in the report. The people of Bangladesh know exactly who these perpetrators are – they belong to a well-defined group. They systematically targeted Awami League leaders, activists, supporters, and police officers across the country in a manner that clearly qualifies as genocide under the 1950 Genocide Convention.

In the earlier part of our report, it was mentioned that the OHCHR report downplays the attacks and killings of Awami League leaders, activists, and police personnel as minor incidents. The genocide that occurred on August 5th and the subsequent events are concealed. However, some murders and rape incidents are mentioned partially. In paragraph 219 of the report, it is stated that more than 200 people were killed when BNP-Jamaat terrorists attacked a hotel owned by Member of Parliament Shahin Chakladar in Jessore, yet the report only mentions the death of 24 people in that incident. Additionally, at the Gazi Tire Factory, which is owned by an Awami League Member of Parliament, more than 350 people were burned to death when the factory was set on fire. The report shows no concern for these atrocities.

In paragraph 222 of the report, the OHCHR admits that it is unable to determine the exact number of Awami League leaders, activists, supporters, and police officers who were killed. They mention receiving some lists, but state that they were unable to verify them. This makes it clear that the OHCHR shows no concern for the thousands of Awami League leaders, activists, and supporters, as well as police officers, who were killed across the country on August 5th and after, nor for the destruction of their homes, shops, and businesses. This is despite the fact that OHCHR is a human rights body of the United Nations.

The illegal and unconstitutional interim government has filed thousands of false murder cases against Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, thousands of Awami League leaders, and countless journalists, intellectuals, lawyers, teachers, artists, and members of various professional and civil society groups in the country. In these cases, millions of people are being named as unknown defendants. Through these fabricated cases, the illegal government is using the judicial system to harass millions of innocent people across the country. There is no concern about this in the OHCHR report. There is no worry about the fact that such activities are against the rule of law and justice. In fact, in paragraph 226 of the report, OHCHR portrays the illegal government's actions of filing widespread murder cases against journalists as "satisfactory."

In paragraph 262 of the report, the issue of immunity granted by the illegal interim government for all acts of terrorism, including killings, between July 15 and August 8, is raised. Regarding this, OHCHR has mentioned international standards of criminal justice in a very lenient manner. This selective approach by OHCHR undermines its credibility, as it fails to address the serious violations of justice and human rights carried out by the government in power, further complicating the situation by not holding the perpetrators accountable.

In paragraph 315 of its report, OHCHR raises allegations of so-called politicization of the police force during the Awami League government. Their statement closely resembles the narrative of BNP-Jamaat. Furthermore, in paragraph 337, OHCHR discusses Bangladesh's judicial process, emphasizing the need to bring criminals to justice and ensure fair and impartial investigations. However, after August 5, the police force was allegedly destroyed with government support, and the illegal and unconstitutional interim government was accused of severely politicizing the police by removing all senior, impartial, and professional officers. Given this, how can a fair, effective, and impartial investigation be conducted, and who will carry it out?

Additionally, many officers, who were politically appointed to critical positions within the police force, were already retired long ago. Appointing such officers, who were already removed from active duty, to sensitive positions in the police force presents a risk of conflicts of interest. This is not only a threat to the public interest but also undermines the principle of rule of law. Many of these retired officers are now involved in various sectors of society, thus posing a risk of conflicting interests while performing key governmental responsibilities.

These crucial matters of public interest and the rule of law have not been addressed in OHCHR's report. Such a biased position from a professional institution of the United Nations is unacceptable.

In paragraph 331 of the report, there seems to be a form of criticism regarding the 1972 Constitution, which is the result of the great Liberation War, and Bengali nationalism. It is not the fault of the OHCHR officials who drafted the report to have limited knowledge about the uniqueness and distinctiveness of the history of the emergence of the state of Bangladesh and the Bengali liberation struggle. However, without a thorough understanding of the ideals of the Bengali liberation struggle and the liberation war, which have been included as the core principles of state governance in the Constitution, any remarks from any United Nations institution against Bangladesh's Constitution and constitutional principles undermine the dignity of the United Nations itself.

In paragraph 332 of the report, it is mentioned that there has been no development in the rural areas of Bangladesh in education and social sectors. However, during Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's decade and a half of governance, Bangladesh has made revolutionary progress in education, healthcare, communication systems, women's empowerment, and other socio-economic sectors, particularly in rural areas. The social safety programs initiated by Sheikh Hasina's government have garnered praise worldwide. Is it possible that they are unaware of these significant achievements?

The biased stance of OHCHR becomes evident in paragraph 290 of the report, where they label only the casualties of the protests as crimes against humanity. During the student protests in Dhaka, BNP-Jamaat terrorists attacked various state establishments. It is now widely known that behind the student protests, both domestic and foreign conspiracies were at play, with the aim of destabilizing the country's democracy and constitutional governance. The conspirators used the protests as an opportunity to orchestrate the killing of some students. Furthermore, if law enforcement agencies violate the rights of citizens or commit crimes themselves, the country's established legal system provides a mechanism for their prosecution.

In this context, the provisions of both international and municipal law would be applicable. However, attributing charges of crimes against humanity to the top levels of the government for these events due to political reasons is entirely illegal and contrary to the rule of law. The legal framework and due process must be followed when addressing such serious allegations, and political influence should not interfere with the judicial process.

On the other hand, the brutal killings of hundreds of Awami League leaders and activists, including police personnel, before and after August 5, have not been recognized as crimes against humanity. This is not only a crime against humanity but also falls under the category of genocide. The report cites the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, stating that since the protesters were specifically targeted, this constitutes a crime against humanity under international law. However, the BNP-Jamaat group carried out terrorist attacks across the country, specifically targeting Awami League leaders, activists, police, and minorities. The terrorists' targets were very specific in their attacks.

According to the provisions of the Rome Statute related to ICT, these killings unquestionably constitute crimes against humanity. Such crimes are also categorized as genocide under the 1948 United Nations Genocide Convention. The OHCHR's perspective is a direct violation of the core human rights documents, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966, and other international human rights laws. The crimes that, by any standard, clearly fall under crimes against humanity or genocide, are not recognized as such by the OHCHR. Conversely, they seem to accept and categorize crimes that do not qualify as crimes against humanity or genocide as such, thereby violating the law and international human rights standards.

In paragraph 290 of the OHCHR report, a contradictory statement is presented. The report states that they have reasonable grounds to believe that the attacks on the protesters during July-August constituted crimes against humanity. However, it also mentions that the OHCHR's process of determining the veracity of these events is of a lower standard than the way criminal courts prove crimes. As a result, OHCHR believes that further evidence is needed to confirm these crimes against humanity.

If international standards require more evidence, why did OHCHR assert that they reasonably believed these incidents constituted crimes against humanity? A fundamental principle of criminal justice is that for a crime to be considered a criminal offense, it must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, meaning the crime must be proven with 100% certainty. Any lingering doubt would render the criminal prosecution invalid.

Given that these matters are currently under judicial review in Bangladesh's courts, and OHCHR itself acknowledges that its findings are of a lower standard than the criminal justice process and that more evidence is required, it is inappropriate for the institution to make definitive conclusions. Such statements, at this stage, go against the principles of rule of law and justice. A more objective statement acknowledging these uncertainties should have been included in the report.

In paragraph 247 of the report, OHCHR states something completely false, revealing the institution's deeply biased mentality. The report claims, "The judicial inquiry was set up only to investigate the killings, terrorism, arson, looting, etc., committed by the quota reform protesters. The investigation focused solely on the protesters, and its purpose was to conceal the widespread terrorism carried out by government forces." However, there was no such provision in the Prime Minister's declaration or the terms of reference of the Judicial Inquiry Committee. No civilized country's judicial inquiry would include such a condition. The question remains: where did OHCHR obtain this information from? Who provided them with such false and absurd details? The nation deserves to know.

Thousands of false murder cases were filed against Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and many others for the killings in July-August. These killings were then declared as genocide and crimes against humanity, leading to cases being filed in the International Criminal Tribunal. The actions of the unlawful, unconstitutional interim government, in this regard, are completely illegal and contrary to the principles of justice and international legal standards, including the Constitution of Bangladesh. However, there is no condemnation or concern about this in the OHCHR report. According to Article 35(2) of our Constitution, multiple trials for the same offense are illegal and prohibited (rule of double jeopardy). Through this, the unconstitutional interim government has violated the Constitution.

In paragraph 301 of the OHCHR report, it is mentioned that former government officials informed them that they had information suggesting that the events of July-August were orchestrated by BNP-Jamaat. However, OHCHR claims that they have not found any information to support this assertion. Furthermore, they state that the central leadership of BNP-Jamaat did not publicly issue any instructions to carry out attacks during the protests. Based on this, OHCHR does not attribute responsibility for the July-August killings and violence to BNP-Jamaat.

However, there is abundant evidence indicating that BNP-Jamaat gave clear instructions for the deaths and terrorist attacks during July and August. It would not have been possible for coordinated attacks to take place simultaneously across the 450 police stations and throughout the country before and after August 5 without directives from BNP-Jamaat's central leadership. All the attackers were BNP-Jamaat members, and there are numerous videos on social media showing this.

On the other hand, there is no information with OHCHR or anyone else that Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina or anyone from the government announced any plans to attack. In fact, during July and August, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina repeatedly instructed law enforcement agencies to ensure that no lives were lost. She directed them to use non-lethal weapons to avoid any casualties or injuries. Furthermore, on July 17, in her address to the nation, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina cautioned the students, their guardians, and relevant authorities about the safety of students. She had received intelligence indicating that BNP-Jamaat militants were planning to kill students and place the blame on the government. She warned that an evil group wanted to create instability in the country by killing students. Later, her concerns and warnings were proven true.

Therefore, OHCHR's one-sided approach of placing the blame for the July-August killings and terrorist attacks solely on the Awami League government, without holding BNP-Jamaat accountable, is unacceptable. This flawed argument is not supported by any jurisprudential principles. We did not find any indication in the report that this UN body made any effort to prove BNP-Jamaat's involvement in the events of July-August.

In paragraph 306 of the report, the responsibility of the illegal and unconstitutional interim government and the situation following August 5th are described. However, it fails to mention the mass killings that took place across the country from August 5th onward. Under the leadership of this illegal, extremist government, there were widespread mob attacks by BNP-Jamaat, resulting in the indiscriminate killing of people, as well as attacks, oppression, and violence against millions of Awami League activists and minority communities. Properties, homes, businesses, and shops were attacked—yet the report raises no concerns about this. Instead, it blindly supports the actions of the illegal and unconstitutional leadership of Yunus.

In the seventh section of the report, under clause 2 titled 'Ongoing Accountability Initiatives by the Interim Government,' OHCHR presents a statement that is completely biased and one-sided. The report claims that the interim government, after August 5, has taken steps to ensure accountability for human rights violations and abuses. However, the report fails to mention that the murders of Awami League activists and leaders, along with police personnel, both before and after August 5, fall under the category of genocide according to international law. Despite this, the illegal interim government did not take any initiative for the prosecution of these killings and other crimes. OHCHR expresses no concern about this issue. Instead, it only mentions that those involved in retaliatory violence and other crimes are still enjoying impunity. It completely overlooks the genocide and crimes against humanity committed by BNP-Jamaat before and after August 5.

The OHCHR has, in a way, legitimized the illegal, controversial, and unprofessional steps taken by the unlawful interim government in the name of prosecuting the killings and other acts of violence. However, they have raised some objections to the procedures and provisions of the International Criminal Tribunal (ICT). We strongly believe that, according to the international standards of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, all actions of the illegal and extremist interim government are undemocratic, unlawful, and illegal. The claim of 'accountability initiatives' mentioned by them is entirely false. An illegitimate force that has unlawfully seized power in a state takes positions entirely opposite to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. This is precisely the position that the illegal extremist interim government has taken in Bangladesh.

In paragraph 61 of the report, it is cited that 66% of the victims were shot by bullets fired by government forces, based on information from Dhaka Medical College Hospital. However, contrary information has already been provided by the current interim government's Home Affairs Adviser, Brigadier Shakhawat Hossain. After visiting various hospitals and reviewing forensic reports held at those hospitals, he found that the majority of the victims died from bullets that were not used by our government forces. Shortly after making this statement, Brigadier Shakhawat Hossain was removed from his position as the Home Affairs Adviser by the unlawful interim government and was assigned to a less important ministry.

In paragraph 337 of the OHCHR report, it discusses the judicial process in Bangladesh and emphasizes the need to bring criminals to justice through fair and impartial investigations. However, after August 5, the way the police force was destroyed with government support and how it was blatantly politicized, raises serious concerns. The senior, impartial, and professional officers of the police force were dismissed, and those appointed to key positions were politically motivated individuals, many of whom had already retired long ago. How can a fair, effective, and impartial investigation be conducted under these circumstances, and who will carry it out?

Beyond the risks of politicization, appointing retired officers who had long been disconnected from police duties to such sensitive positions goes against the principles of public interest and the rule of law. Many of these retired officials had already engaged in various societal sectors, creating a conflict of interest when performing significant government duties. These critical issues related to public interest and the rule of law were not addressed in the OHCHR report, which is unexpected from a professional institution like the United Nations.

The OHCHR report, in paragraph 344, discusses the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. However, after August 5, the way the country's Chief Justice and senior judges of the highest court were removed through 'mob rule' is something we have never seen before in history. The judicial system, and specifically an independent and impartial judiciary, is fundamental to the rule of law. Without the rule of law, democracy and democratic governance become ineffective.

Yet, despite the gravity of this issue, the OHCHR's detailed 114-page report does not concern or even mention it. Given how the previous government's actions are vilified throughout the report, it seems that the report may have been prepared under the patronage of an illegal usurper government. This absence of acknowledgement of such a blatant attack on the judiciary raises serious questions about the neutrality and fairness of the OHCHR's position in this matter.