Dhaka //

Photo: Collected. The opposition is not in favor of forming another force like RAB. Leader of the Opposition Dr. Shafiqur Rahman stated this on Thursday (September 10) afternoon while participating in the discussion on the SRB Bill on the final day of the third session of the 13th National Parliament.

Speaking on the ‘Special Response Battalion (SRB) Bill-2026’, the Leader of the Opposition remarked that the public would not accept the formation of the SRB if it merely involved changing the name while keeping RAB’s manpower, infrastructure, logistics, and powers intact. Calling for further discussion and in-depth review, he demanded the withdrawal of the bill.

The Leader of the Opposition stated that this bill is not like the usual bills in national life; it is entirely different. The country’s overall experience since the establishment of RAB has not been pleasant. Although the force had some positive aspects, the negative aspects were so significant that they caused global concern. Many people have suffered at the hands of RAB. “I myself am a victim, though I survived. However, many have lost their lives tragically or fallen victim to enforced disappearances. Their whereabouts remain unknown.” He also cited the case of Member of Parliament Mir Ahmad Bin Quasem, who was abducted by RAB but later returned.

The Leader of the Opposition further mentioned that the husband of reserved-seat MP Marjia Begum was a renowned physician known for his humanitarian work. Around midnight, he was taken from his room to the rooftop and subjected to inhumane torture. Later, he was thrown off the roof while still alive. He noted that family members witnessed this tragic incident right before their eyes.

Observing that these were the reasons behind the demand to disband RAB, he noted that various human rights organizations—both domestic and international—had spoken out on the matter. However, no one had demanded the formation of another similar force after disbanding RAB; the demand was solely for its dissolution. Now, it appears the government has proposed creating another force of the same nature. It is not merely a proposal; steps have been taken to form a new force while retaining the existing personnel and keeping everything else virtually unchanged.

Citing a recent incident, he noted that just five days prior to the bill’s discussion in Parliament, a shocking event occurred: an attempt was made to abduct a former female student of Jagannath University in Old Dhaka from her home. There was no search warrant involved. Had university administration officials not rushed to the scene, she would have been taken away.

The opposition leader remarked that RAB members are simply being transferred from one location to another. Their facilities, logistics, and powers will remain exactly as they were. So, where is the change? Only the name has been altered; beyond that, there have been no fundamental changes.

Dr. Shafiqur Rahman stated that he had thoroughly studied the bill and reviewed the ‘note of dissent’ submitted by the opposition in the standing committee. He recalled that the force was originally established during the tenure of the BNP-led four-party alliance government, when Lutfuzzaman Babar served as the State Minister for Home Affairs. Members of the nationalist camp were the primary victims of RAB’s actions, followed by others; ultimately, no segment of the nation was spared.

Highlighting civil society’s concerns regarding the SRB bill, Dr. Shafiqur Rahman noted that objections have been raised since the matter came to light. Everyone is concerned. The justification for such a force needs to be clarified further. The nation needs to feel that such a specialized force is necessary; the people must be reassured on this point. Otherwise, the nation will not view this initiative favorably.

The opposition leader further stated that the formation of this force would not address the objections and demands raised by the international community. Instead, establishing such a force would leave Bangladesh mired in its previous state of disrepute.

Pointing out that while minor changes and certain obligations were added to the bill, no fundamental alterations were made, he remarked that a system where “I am the accused, yet I conduct the investigation” is unacceptable. He suggested that the bill should be reintroduced later following due deliberation and discussion.

Read the news and share your opinion.