The Cost of Justice in Bangladesh: Quota Reform Movement's Deadly Scenario

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh's most recent verdict on the quota reform movement has far-reaching repercussions for the country's civil service recruiting rules. The court rejected a High Court judgment that maintained the contentious quota system, which gave 30% of government positions to independence fighters, their children and grandchildren from the 1971 Liberation War. According to the Appellate Division's decision, 93% of government employment will be merit-based, with 5% designated for the freedom fighters quota and 2% for individuals with disabilities, members of ethnic minorities, and the third genders.

This decision was spurred by rising protests and civil turmoil, which resulted in many deaths and injuries. The protests, spearheaded mostly by students, called for a merit-based recruitment system, claiming that the quota system was discriminatory and hampered equal opportunities for all candidates. This verdict comes as Bangladesh struggles with high inflation, declining foreign reserves, and rising unemployment, making the merit-based system an important step toward ensuring fairness and efficiency in government recruitment.

The Quota Reform Movement can be regarded successful in light of the Supreme Court's recent decision. However, this victory came at a high cost. The demonstrations over the return of the quota system resulted in widespread violence and instability across Bangladesh, killing over a hundred people and injuring thousands more. The social and emotional toll on families and communities, combined with the disruption of educational institutions, begs the question of whether the reforms, while essential and just, were implemented too late.

From July 15 to August 2, the situation in Bangladesh worsened rapidly as the government, with the support of the Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL), cracked down on the quota reform movement. The crackdown resulted in what many term a bloodbath, with widespread accounts of violence, arbitrary arrests, and deaths. To restrict the flow of information and keep the rest of the world from witnessing the events, the government turned off mobile networks, the internet, broadband connections, and WiFi. This blackout was meant to stifle media coverage and muzzle protesters' voices.

After getting out of the blackout, the media reported terrible reports about young children aged 6 to 10 being shot while playing on rooftops or watching rallies from balconies, as well as minors being remanded. Six student protest leaders were detained, tortured, and pushed into delivering fake statements calling for a stop to the protests. The general student protesters refuted the statement and presented a nine-point demand, giving the government an ultimatum, but peaceful rallies were greeted with live bullets, infringing on their constitutional rights to assemble and peaceful protest.

Authorities accused the deceased students of belonging to parties such as Razakar (Collaborators of Pakistan in 1971), Jamaat, Shibir, and the BNP, and used these claims to justify the brutality. Even if some of the students who demonstrated were members of opposition parties, the Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL) or any other organization has no power to attack, harass, or violate the law. Despite these designations, the savagery was clear through the reports of the media: around 300 people were killed, over 50,000 people were injured, approximately 3,000 were arrested, and countless others were assaulted, maimed, or abducted. Unfortunately, in these types of protests, the actual numbers are far more than the official ones. Despite overwhelming evidence of instability and brutality, the government maintained a fa?ade of normalcy, stating that the country was stable.

In reaction, non-resident Bangladeshis (NRBs) have backed the protests by withholding remittances, further straining the already ailing economy. Finally, some teachers, scholars, and celebrities awoke from their slumber and spoke out in support of the students, but the government's sympathy appeared to be limited to injured members of the armed forces and BCL, with the Prime Minister visiting them and declaring national mourning on July 30.

Instead of respecting the government-declared national mourning, citizens protested by changing their social media profile images to red, signifying the bloodshed, and wearing red in public rallies. #SaveBangladeshiStudents, #StudentKillerHasina, #StepDownHasina, and other hashtags have been trending on social media platforms. Some Awami League and Chhatra League members have also quit their posts to support the students.

During the protests, the Bangladeshi government broke several local and international laws, including its own constitution. Domestically, the freedom to peaceful assembly and protest, provided by Article 37 of the Bangladesh Constitution, was flagrantly disregarded. The excessive use of force against unarmed demonstrators, including the use of live bullets, breached the fundamental rights to life and personal liberty guaranteed by Article 32. Arbitrary arrests and detentions without due process violated Article 33, which prohibits arbitrary detention. The fundamental rights protected by the Bangladeshi constitution under Articles 27 (Equality before the law), 31 (Right to protection of the law), 32 (Protection of life and personal liberty), and so forth are violated, which also threatens the rule of law.

Internationally, the government violated various human rights duties. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), particularly Articles 19 and 20, protects the rights to free expression and peaceful assembly, both of which were prohibited. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Bangladesh is a signatory, was also violated, particularly Articles 6, 7, and 9, which protect the right to life, freedom from torture, and personal security. The shutdown of communication networks violated the right to knowledge and free speech, as well as international principles. The killing of children and juveniles constituted a serious violation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, particularly Articles 6 and 37, which provide the right to life and protection from inhumane treatment.

National TV channels, newspapers and media are afraid to report on the country's genuine situation. Individuals who have shown support for the protests or opposed the government's ruthless reaction on social media or in newspapers have faced serious consequences. This deliberate targeting of journalists, activists, and ordinary residents violates the basic right to freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 39 of the Bangladesh Constitution. The international community has voiced concern, urging the Bangladeshi government to respect its citizens' rights and end its oppressive practices.

The Detective Branch (DB) police have introduced another layer of harassment and intimidation to supporters of the quota reform movement. On the streets, DB officers have stopped people, searched their phones, and detained anyone caught with protest-related images, videos, or social media posts, which is a clear violation of law. Furthermore, DB police have been conducting late-night searches on the residences of protest supporters. They abduct people without legal warrants while dressed in civilian clothes, infringing on the fundamental right to personal liberty and security. Such actions directly violate Articles 32 and 33 of the Bangladesh Constitution, as well as international human rights standards.

In the face of such serious abuses, international organizations and institutions must act quickly to defend Bangladeshi students and protect human rights. The United Nations, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the International Labour Organization and others should apply diplomatic pressure on the Bangladeshi government to end its deadly crackdown and comply with international human rights norms. These groups can help by documenting violations, providing legal aid, and fighting for the protection of fundamental rights.

The author, Md. Shawkat Alam Faisal, is an Apprentice Lawyer at the Bangladesh Bar Council.