'Enforced disappearances extended beyond borders'

The full report of the Commission formed to investigate enforced disappearances during the Awami League regime reveals that such incidents extended beyond the country's borders.

The report, published on Tuesday, said that victims were, in some cases, "abducted in one country and delivered to the authorities of another", a process which "would not be possible without the collusion or active cooperation" of authorities on both sides of the border.

According to the report, the Border Guard Bangladesh and India's Border Security Force played a facilitating role in these operations. Testimony assessed by the Commission indicates that Rapid Action Battalion officers "routinely informed BGB in advance" of planned renditions and specified "the exact border point" where detainees would be transferred. Vehicles reportedly crossed "a few hundred metres into Indian territory", where captives were "handed over to Indian intelligence and security agencies directly or through intermediaries".

The Commission identifies Shukhoranjan Bali, BNP leader Salauddin Ahmed, Mehedi Hasan Dollar and Rahamatullah as "stark examples of cross-border rendition involving India". In an effort to trace missing persons, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs sought official data from India. Lists of 1,052 and later 3,285 Bangladeshi nationals held in Indian prisons were provided, but the Commission report said that "no match was found" when these lists were cross-checked with unresolved disappearance cases.

Similarly, individuals pushed back into Bangladesh by the BSF did not account for those still missing, it added.

The report warns that persistent allegations of involvement in enforced disappearance "seriously undermine the legitimacy of BGB and the rule of law", cautioning that failure to act risks normalising such practices within state institutions.

One of the most consequential findings in the report concerns responsibility at the senior-most levels of state security agencies.

The Commission explicitly rejects claims that enforced disappearances were the work of rogue officers, stating that such arguments are "inconsistent with the scale, coordination and standardisation observed".

Applying the doctrine of command responsibility, the report notes that superiors may be held liable where they "knew, or should have known" of crimes committed under their authority and failed to prevent or punish them. Physical absence from detention sites "does not absolve responsibility", the Commission said.

The proximity of secret detention facilities to agency headquarters is cited as decisive.

The RAB Taskforce for Interrogation centre was located within minutes' walking distance of RAB headquarters, where senior commanders were based.

This proximity, combined with evidence of routine oversight, is said to "eliminate any plausible defence of ignorance". Comparable findings are made regarding DGFI's Joint Interrogation Cell, located "approximately two minutes' walk" from DGFI headquarters and subject to regular visits by senior officers.

Similar conclusions are drawn for Police Headquarters, the Detective Branch, NSI and CTTC. Responsibility is attributed to inspectors general, unit chiefs and other senior officials based on command authority and control over detention facilities. Crucially, the Commission underscores that enforced disappearance is a "continuing crime", meaning that liability extends to successive commanders who exercised authority over detention sites during the period of captivity.

Obstruction and evidence destruction after August 5

The report documents extensive obstruction following 5 August 2024, when previously concealed detention facilities began to be uncovered. The Commission records that many sites had been "structurally altered to conceal their prior use", while detention records were "missing, destroyed or deliberately falsified".

At the RAB Taskforce for Interrogation centre, cells were discovered only after concealed structures were broken open, despite the fact that detainees, including Barrister Arman, had been released from the same facility after 5 August. The Commission describes this as evidence that "efforts to erase traces of secret detention continued even after the political transition".