Online Desk //

The allegation that the interim government of Bangladesh is responsible for the violence mentioned in the US Commission on International Religious Freedom USCIRF report is absolutely not true. The claim that the violence occurred after the removal of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is misleading. There is no solid evidence for this.

The press wing of the Chief Adviser gave this information on Thursday (March 27). The government cited several reasons as reasons. They are:

There is no credible evidence to support the claim that the interim government led by Professor Muhammad Yunus is responsible for the violence against religious minorities. Bangladesh Police have thoroughly investigated the incident claimed by the Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council.

Their investigation revealed that most of the deaths reported were not the result of communal violence or religious hatred but were due to personal disputes, accidents, property disputes and even suicide. These incidents were not motivated by religious motives, but by other socio-economic or personal reasons.

The claim that hundreds of Hindus were killed in religious violence after the departure of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is completely false. Almost no Hindus or anyone from any other religious community has been killed in communal violence since Sheikh Hasina was ousted. Such violence, as mentioned in the report, has not been substantiated by any credible evidence.

In fact, Bangladesh is experiencing a relatively peaceful period for religious minorities, as stated in the USCIRF report.

Bangladesh police have investigated claims by religious minority groups such as the Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Oikya Parishad and have found only a few cases of organized, communal violence or hate crimes against religious groups.

The nature of the deaths cited in the report was not due to religious hatred, but rather personal or family reasons. The USCIRF report’s omission of these investigations raises questions about the thoroughness and fairness of its research.

The report notes the proliferation of false claims on traditional and social media following the violent protests. It is important to note, however, that these media sources have often been driven by political agendas, spreading misinformation aimed at discrediting the interim government.

USCIRF should have conducted an independent investigation, rather than relying on potentially biased sources that spread false information.

If USCIRF truly functions as an independent, bipartisan agency, it is disappointing that it did not conduct its own investigation into the events. Instead, it relied on baseless claims and one-sided statements that serve to unfairly tarnish Bangladesh’s reputation.

If USCIRF had done its due diligence, it would have realized that the situation in Bangladesh, especially religious violence, was not as dire as the report suggests.

The political unrest in Bangladesh, including protests and clashes between political parties, has sometimes been misrepresented as religious violence. While there may be tensions involving religious groups, it is essential to understand that these incidents were primarily political rather than religious persecution.

This distinction is important to understand the situation properly and to avoid oversimplifying a complex political event into a religious conflict.

Despite the challenges faced during this period, the interim government has expressed a clear commitment to protecting all minority communities. This position has been evident in its public statements and efforts to mitigate any harm to vulnerable groups.

The USCIRF report omits these positive steps and instead focuses on the deterioration of religious freedom, which is not consistent with the reality.

Finally, the government states that the USCIRF’s portrayal of the religious freedom situation in Bangladesh is based on inaccurate information and anecdotal reports. The interim government is not responsible for the violence. Police investigations have shown that the incidents cited are not related to religious hatred.

Share your thoughts.