RAB abolished on paper, to continue under new name

The Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) has faced allegations of serious human rights violations, including enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings and the operation of secret detention centres.

The United Nations, the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances and various other quarters had called for and recommended the force’s abolition.

Even before the national election, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) had held a press conference demanding RAB’s abolition.

Yet, instead of abolishing the force, the government is retaining it under the name Special Response Battalion, or SRB.

At a Cabinet meeting on Monday, the draft of the “Special Response Battalion (SRB) Act, 2026” received policy and final approval, subject to vetting by the Legislative and Parliamentary Affairs Division.

According to a government information note, the existing RAB will be abolished and a specialised unit called the SRB will be established under the police force.

A review of the draft law approved by the Cabinet shows that although “RAB” will be abolished on paper, almost all aspects of the force’s institutional continuity will remain.

RAB’s existing personnel, powers, authority, facilities, funds, property, accounts, records and other assets will be transferred to the SRB. RAB’s officers and employees will also be deemed members of the new unit.

The SRB will also assume RAB’s liabilities and responsibilities, contracts, and ongoing cases filed by or against the force.

As a result, rather than dismantling the force and creating an entirely new structure, the arrangement essentially allows RAB’s activities to continue under a new name and a separate legal framework.

At the same time, the new unit will have the authority to investigate criminal offences, conduct searches, make arrests and seize property. The draft law also provides for the unit to have its own detention facilities, storage facilities and interrogation rooms.

Considering RAB’s past activities, the United Nations, the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances and domestic and international human rights organisations had recommended abolishing the force.

On 10 December 2021, the United States imposed sanctions on RAB and seven former and serving officers of the force over allegations of human rights violations.

Another politically significant issue is the BNP’s previous position. On 10 December 2024, during the interim government’s tenure, the party held a press conference and directly demanded RAB’s abolition.

The BNP had said at the time that the force should be abolished rather than reformed. Yet the BNP government is now moving towards retaining RAB’s existing structure simply by changing its name.

However, Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed told Prothom Alo on Tuesday night that it was not a matter of retaining RAB’s old structure and merely changing its name. He said the law itself provides for committees to address citizens’ complaints as well as internal complaints from members of the force.

The law also clearly specifies which activities by members will constitute disciplinary offences and how action will be taken against them. In his words, RAB previously had shortcomings in accountability and transparency, and the new law introduces changes in those areas.

Asked why RAB was being retained under another name despite demands from the BNP and various other quarters for its abolition, the Home Minister said, “RAB is indeed being abolished. This (SRB) is a new battalion. The state needs such a force while upholding human rights. Tackling new forms of crime, including cybercrime, drugs and organised crime, requires specialised training, specialised equipment, human resources and capabilities.”

Regarding the retention of the provision allowing members to be recruited from the armed forces, the home minister said that there had previously been a lack of accountability and transparency, and that political governments had used the force as they wished.

“The government will no longer be able to use them in that manner at will,” he stated.

In his view, how effectively any law works ultimately depends on political will, the directives of those running the state, and how the law is implemented.

However, human rights activist M Nur Khan believes the draft law cannot be supported.

“Although the government says it will abolish RAB and establish the SRB, there is nothing new here. It only proposes forming a committee comprising government representatives and personnel appointed by the force. A major question is how independently and effectively it will be able to operate. If the old structure and powers remain in place, the SRB could emerge as another dangerous force,” he told Prothom Alo.

The draft approved by the Cabinet contains 27 sections. Twenty-six of these sections detail both the repeal of RAB and how its institutional continuity will be maintained in the new unit.

The Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) was formed through the Armed Police Battalions (Amendment) Act, 2003.

According to the draft of the new SRB law, once it comes into force, the 2003 amendment through which RAB was established will be repealed.

However, all of RAB’s assets, rights, powers, authority, facilities, funds, cash and bank deposits, liabilities, movable and immovable property, account books, registers, records and other assets will be transferred to the SRB.

Officers and employees currently serving in RAB will also become members of the SRB. Under the new law, they will continue to work under their existing terms and conditions until those terms are changed in accordance with the law.

All liabilities and responsibilities of RAB, as well as contracts entered into by or with the force, will be treated as liabilities and contracts of the SRB.

Ongoing court cases and other legal proceedings involving RAB, whether filed by or against the force, will also continue in the name of the SRB. Similarly, cases or legal proceedings filed against RAB members will not be cancelled merely because the force’s name has changed.

Section 13 of the existing law provides immunity from liability for actions carried out by RAB members “in good faith”. The draft SRB law, however, contains no similar provision granting immunity.

Until new regulations are introduced, RAB’s existing departmental proceedings and disciplinary rules will remain in force in the new unit, with necessary modifications and adaptations.

One of the most heavily criticised aspects of RAB’s structure has been the regular deployment of members of the armed forces (Army, Navy and Air Force) in law enforcement duties.

The Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances and human rights activists had recommended that if a new specialised force were established, it should consist solely of trained police personnel. The draft approved by the Cabinet does not reflect that recommendation.

The SRB will be a specialised unit under the Bangladesh Police. Its director general will be an officer serving in the police at the rank of additional inspector general of police.

However, Section 4(3) of the approved draft allows officers and members to be deputed or temporarily attached to the SRB from the armed forces and other disciplined forces, in addition to the police, when necessary.

The draft defines “disciplined forces” as the armed forces in the sense used in Article 152 of the Constitution. This means the law will continue to allow members of the Army, Navy and Air Force to join the SRB.

Justice Moyeenul Islam Chowdhury, who served as chairman of the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances, told Prothom Alo that the commission had recommended that if a specialised force were retained after abolishing RAB, it should consist solely of police personnel.

He said, “Members of the Army, Navy, Air Force or any other force should not be included. When an armed forces officer is deputed to RAB, he moves outside the regular command structure of his parent force. If that officer becomes involved in a crime while serving in RAB, the professionalism and image of the parent force come under question.”

The new unit will have a broad range of responsibilities. The SRB will be responsible for maintaining internal security, gathering intelligence, recovering illegal arms, ammunition and explosives, combating drug-related offences, cybercrime, human trafficking and organised crime.

The SRB will also take action against those involved in violence against women and children, rape, trafficking and crimes against humanity, and will work to prevent terrorist activities and other crimes.

In addition, the new unit will assist other law enforcement agencies and will be responsible for filing and investigating cases at the direction of courts, the government or the Inspector General of Police.

Under Section 12 of the approved draft, the SRB will, in specified circumstances, have the authority to enter premises, conduct searches, seize items and make arrests without a warrant.

It may exercise these powers in cases involving drugs, arms, explosives, terrorist organisations or hideouts, human trafficking, organised crime, cybercrime and offences against state security.

In relevant cases, an SRB officer will also be able to exercise the powers of an investigating police officer.

Another important aspect of the SRB’s mandate is the expansion of its authority to investigate criminal offences. Previously, only the government could instruct RAB to conduct an investigation.

Under the new arrangement, a court, the government or the IGP will be able to instruct the SRB director general at any time to investigate a criminal offence.

The director general will be able to assign the investigation to a police officer holding the rank of sub-inspector (SI) or above.

Three officers currently serving at different levels of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) told Prothom Alo that RAB currently conducts operations, arrests suspects and gathers intelligence, while the police or other investigative agencies conduct investigations in most cases.

In special circumstances, some cases were assigned to RAB by the ministry. At times, RAB itself would request and take over the investigation of certain high-profile cases.

The draft provides for the SRB to have its own detention facilities, evidence storage facilities and interrogation rooms. It states that these facilities will be maintained as necessary for conducting investigations and that existing procedures must be followed when submitting cases to court or filing charge sheets.

Section 14 of the approved draft SRB law states that an arrested person must be handed over “without delay” to the custody of the nearest police station.

Meanwhile, Section 15(4) states that the SRB will have its own detention facilities and interrogation rooms. The draft does not clearly explain how these two provisions will operate alongside each other—specifically, who may be detained in an SRB facility, under what circumstances and for how long.

This provision is particularly significant given RAB’s past activities. After the fall of the Awami League government following the July mass uprising, allegations of secret detention centres, unlawful detention and torture by RAB resurfaced.

According to the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances, its investigations found RAB involvement in around 25 per cent of the enforced disappearance cases it examined—the highest proportion for any single force.

Of the 40 secret detention centres identified by the commission across the country, 22 to 23 were operated by RAB.

Earlier, after analysing records from the police Special Branch, Prothom Alo found that 1,007 ‘crossfire’ incidents between 2015 and 2021 resulted in the deaths of 1,293 people. RAB was named in 293 of those incidents.

On 12 December 2024, then-RAB director general AKM Shahidur Rahman formally apologised for the force’s past activities. He also acknowledged that RAB had operated secret detention centres during the Awami League government’s tenure.

Given this history, the draft does not contain separate, detailed provisions on safeguards for people detained in the new unit’s own detention and interrogation facilities, such as recording detainees’ information, CCTV surveillance, access to lawyers and family members, independent inspections, and measures to prevent torture in custody.

A significant addition to the new law compared with the RAB framework is the "Complaints Redress Committee". A five-member committee will address complaints lodged by citizens as well as internal grievances raised by SRB members.

However, four of the five members will be officials from the government, police and the relevant unit. The fifth member will be a government-nominated person with at least 10 years of experience in human rights, law or judicial administration.

Once it establishes that a complaint is substantiated, the committee will recommend action to the relevant controlling authority rather than directly imposing a punishment. This raises questions about how independently the committee will be able to operate and how effective its recommendations will be.

In 2004, during the BNP government’s tenure, RAB was formed with members of the police, Army, Navy and Air Force, as well as the then-Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), Coast Guard and Ansar.

Initially, the force attracted attention for its operations against top criminals and organised crime groups.

Later, it faced serious allegations of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, torture, and being used for political and personal disputes. These allegations subsequently intensified pressure on successive governments to abolish RAB.

This time, the government’s information note describes the new law as legislation to “abolish” RAB and establish the SRB. However, people familiar with the matter say the decision to retain RAB’s existing structure and authorities under a new name is essentially like putting an old product in new packaging.

Human rights activist Nur Khan said, “When allegations of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings and other serious human rights violations have accumulated against a force over a long period, there is no reason to believe that relaunching that force under a new name will solve the problem.”

According to him, “If members of the armed forces remain in the force as before, it will make no fundamental difference whatever name is given to the force or whatever uniform its members wear.”