No more 'powerless' Human Rights Commission needed: Debapriya
He pointed out that although the interim government abolished the commission in November 2024, it has failed to come up with an alternative in nearly a year and the draft law prepared during this time is riddled with problems
Distinguished Fellow of the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) Dr Debapriya Bhattacharya has said the people of Bangladesh do not want another weak and toothless Human Rights Commission without authority or efficiency.
He made the remark today (27 September) while speaking at a discussion titled 'Draft Human Rights Commission Act 2025' organised by the Bangladesh Reform Watch.
The question of reconstituting the National Human Rights Commission has come up for discussion again. Due to the absence of the commission for a year, institutional initiatives to protect human rights have practically come to a standstill. In the meantime, a draft law to form a new commission has been published, on which experts are giving different opinions.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
Debapriya said the initiative to form a national human rights commission was first taken during the Fakhruddin-led caretaker government in 2007, and by 2009 a draft law was prepared to set the roadmap.
Later, the Awami League government changed the draft at will and established the commission through parliament, but it turned out to be ineffective, he said.
"We do not want a commission that is practically toothless, with no power to bite," said Dr Debapriya Bhattacharya. "We need a strong commission that can genuinely play a role in protecting human rights."
He added that the new commission should not be led by someone known as a "spineless good person." He said, "We need honest, principled, and courageous people who can even fight with the government if necessary."
If a spineless good man is appointed as the commission's head. No matter how good a person is, if they have no backbone, they cannot run a human rights commission
"If a spineless good man was appointed as the commission's head. No matter how good a person is, if they have no backbone, they cannot run a human rights commission," Debapriya said.
He pointed out that although the interim government abolished the commission in November 2024, it has failed to come up with an alternative in nearly a year. The draft law prepared during this time, he added, is riddled with problems.
Supreme Court lawyer Barrister Jyotirmoy Barua said the draft carries many of the flaws of the previous commission law.
Whenever we went to the commission, all it did was send letters to the home ministry and consider its duty done. Beyond that, it took no action
"There is no clear provision on how long the commission should take to dispose of complaints. It is also unclear whether a person with dual citizenship can become a member of the commission. The draft also lacks clarity on funding — whether allocations will come directly from the national budget or otherwise," he said.
He said the previous law allowed government bureaucrats to be part of the commission, creating a clear conflict of interest, and there is still no clarity on whether that practice will continue.
Barua stated that while the previous human rights commission worked in some areas, it failed to play an effective role on sensitive issues like the Chittagong Hill Tracts.
He criticised the new draft law for including provisions for appointing dual citizens and bureaucrats, which he sees as a clear violation of the Paris Principles.
Sharing her experience, Sanjida Islam, coordinator of Mayer Daak, an organisation of families of enforced disappearance victims, said, "Whenever we went to the commission, all it did was send letters to the home ministry and consider its duty done. Beyond that, it took no action."
Echoing her, Debapriya added that the commission used to report 100% task completion every year, while in reality its activities only meant sending letters to ministries.
The discussion, organised by Bangladesh Reform Watch, had two main objectives: first, to analyse the structure, independence, and functions of the commission in the proposed draft against international standards, and second, to provide recommendations to make the draft more effective.
Human rights activists from different sectors, as well as UN and foreign representatives, also joined the discussion and shared their views.
