Should RAB go?
The Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) was established in 2004 with the intent to combat terrorism, organized crime, and militancy. But soon after its formation, RAB became embroiled in a long list of human rights violations. Despite that, RAB was controversially awarded the "Independence Award" in 2006 for its "social work."
Unaccountable for its actions, RAB's excesses involving extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, and torture escalated under the Awami League government.
For example, the 2014 Narayanganj seven murders in which RAB officers were found guilty; the shooting of Limon which shook the nation and allegations of involvement in involuntary disappearances, made the unit's name synonymous with brutality.
Despite these violations, RAB enjoyed impunity under different regimes. The AL, while critical of RAB's excesses in its early years, later became a staunch defender.
As its violations of human rights escalated to an unprecedented extent, the United States imposed sanctions on the force in 2021. Calls to dissolve RAB have become more frequent since, with many political parties and human rights groups demanding its disbandment or reform.
The Business Standard spoke with academics, politicians, and a former Police IGP to explore the context of RAB's controversial history and the current calls for its dissolution. The discussion highlights the political missteps and failures that led to the creation of an unaccountable force, and the challenges ahead in re-establishing law and order in Bangladesh.
No merit in maintaining a force reliant on quick fixes
CR Abrar
Former professor of International Relations, University of Dhaka
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
The BNP formed RAB as a quick fix, believing it to be an effective response to the deteriorating law and order situation at the time. However, from the outset, concerns were raised about the sustainability of this approach.
What was fundamentally required was to ensure efficiency, proper recruitment, and professionalism within the police and other law enforcement agencies, aligning them with their respective mandates to build capable forces. Instead of pursuing that route, the BNP opted for a shortcut. Now, they themselves are saying that RAB has to be dissolved because the force has deviated from its intended purpose, leading to significant loss of lives and a lack of accountability.
RAB now bears significant baggage, particularly due to its reputation as an institution that has not developed in line with legal principles. It is alleged to have been involved in extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. The current discourse about its dissolution is rooted in this context.
Another issue is that personnel from the army and other services were deputed to RAB, bringing entirely different orientations and training, including a focus on countering external enemies.
This blend was never meant to work. Moreover, when these individuals return to their original forces, they may carry with them a different mindset. We do not know the extent to which this impacts their parent organisations, as there has been no assessment of this. Any force tasked with specific mandates must develop professionalism aligned with those mandates.
In this context, I believe RAB has to go. I see no merit in maintaining a force reliant on quick fixes. There is also the issue of public perception. Some might suggest simply changing RAB's name, but it is unclear how much that would actually help.
The crux of the matter is that building a rights-respecting, disciplined, and professional force is a difficult task—especially when the force is composed of individuals from diverse backgrounds and orientations. Instead, the focus should be on developing a cohesive, well-trained, and professional force that truly serves the people.
A new force with same expertise can be created, but with accountability under law
Salahuddin Ahmed
Standing Committee Member, BNP
The credibility of RAB has been totally damaged. Internationally, various bodies have raised concerns, and sanctions from the US State Department are still in force. The sanctions were imposed after an extensive investigation.
Internationally, the image of our law enforcement agencies has largely been defined by RAB. Other agencies, such as DGFI, DB, and CID, are also subject to similar scrutiny.
However, the sanctions on RAB have garnered global attention, highlighting the human rights violations it has committed, including brutal enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings. Credible international human rights organizations have presented these cases with compelling evidence, including audio and video recordings.
This is why many political parties and stakeholders within the country do not want this organisation to function in the country. As a major political party, the BNP has been calling for its dissolution for some time and continues to stand by this position. The demand for RAB's disbandment has also been included in the police reform report.
Now, some will be quick to point out that this elite force was created by the BNP. When this force was created, it had certain goals and ideals, but the past regime deviated from its goals and ideals.
In the future, if the people of Bangladesh wish to establish a highly technical elite force, it will be up to the parliament to decide. For now, however, having an organization with this name in the country is highly awkward for us.
A new organization can be established with the same technical qualifications, expertise, equipment, and technology, but one that is accountable under the law. The current organization, by contrast, lacked accountability.
An elite force is necessary to carry out tasks outside routine police work
Nurul Huda, former IGP
Every country has a special force; we formed one too (RAB). The primary objectives behind forming the elite force were gathering intelligence and investigating serious crimes. BNP is claiming that the force has been unable to fulfil those duties. And their claims have merits too.
But every force has to work under political direction. Then you need policy guidelines. And you need to follow them by the book. The objectives were never crossfire or other criminal behaviours. There are mechanisms to control such deviance. If the supervisory board is not working, then they can go astray.
Now, keeping an elite force is a political decision. If the government thinks that no elite force is needed, then they can disband it. But elite forces are everywhere in the world.
I believe elite forces are needed. Their tasks need to be outlined specifically. They need to be supervised and monitored. And then, when they are running by the book, there will be no need to disband them. You don't cut off your head if it hurts, do you?
But if it is beyond recovery, it can be disbanded. Usually in armed forces, units are disbanded after a mutiny. But the objectives for which the elite force was created have to be carried out.
If RAB is disbanded, then these duties can be assigned to other units, or a new force. But the fact remains that an elite force is needed to carry out tasks other than routine police work.
