A growing controversy surrounding Bangladesh’s “July Martyrs Gazette” has taken a new turn, with allegations that the document not only contains inconsistencies but also enabled a reversal of legal roles, where alleged victims and complainants were later treated as accused in criminal cases.
The Gazette, which recognises 843 individuals as victims of last year’s anti-quota unrest, has been sharply criticised by sections of analysts and investigators who claim it facilitated the targeting of leaders and supporters of the Awami League. According to these claims, individuals whose homes and businesses were allegedly attacked, looted or burned after August 5, 2024, subsequently faced arrest and harassment in murder cases.
At the same time, critics allege that individuals linked to the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and Jamaat-e-Islami were effectively shielded, raising questions about whether the Gazette influenced the framing of cases and the identification of perpetrators.
Observers point to what they describe as a narrative shift in which political identities were obscured, with references to “students and the public” or “Tawhidi masses” replacing specific affiliations. This, they argue, contributed to a broader perception that blurred the distinction between victims and aggressors.
Serious concerns have also been raised over the compilation process of the Gazette. It reportedly omits key details such as the date, time, place and cause of death, along with basic identifiers such as age, occupation and accurate addresses. The absence of a structured format and the presence of alleged spelling inconsistencies have made independent verification difficult.
Despite these challenges, teams of journalists and retired police officers have verified information for 722 of the 843 listed individuals. Their findings suggest that at least 370 names may not be directly linked to the anti-quota movement, while 121 entries remain unverified because of insufficient or inconsistent data.
The controversy deepens with conflicting casualty figures. The United Nations Human Rights Office has reported approximately 1,400 deaths during the period under review. However, critics argue that both the UN list and the Gazette lack comprehensive verification, casting doubt on claims that all the deaths were connected to the protests.
Questions have also been raised about deaths occurring after August 5, when former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina left office. Critics argue that individuals who died in subsequent mob violence, accidents or unrelated incidents were included in the Gazette, despite the official criteria limiting recognition to those killed between June 1 and August 5.
One of the most contentious cases cited involves a deadly fire at Hotel Zabeer International in Jashore on August 5. According to reports cited by critics, some of those included in the Gazette died after allegedly participating in the attack, looting and arson at the hotel. A total of 24 people reportedly died in the blaze, with several fatalities attributed to burns and smoke inhalation.
The inclusion of such cases has intensified claims that the Gazette may have contributed to a legal and political environment in which accountability was selectively applied. Allegations suggest that complainants, who initially reported attacks or losses, were later named as accused in cases, while others were classified as victims or “martyrs”.
Further scrutiny has been directed at the role of officials associated with the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT), including former Chief Prosecutor Tajul Islam. Critics allege that the list was expanded to support claims of large-scale atrocities by the previous government, though these assertions remain politically contested.
Questions have also been raised about the verification process under Volker Türk and the involvement of interim administration figures such as Muhammad Yunus.
The debate has raised several unresolved issues: the exact number of protest-related deaths before August 5, the accuracy of the Gazette’s entries, and whether responsibility for post-transition violence was misattributed.
Analysts note that the implications extend beyond documentation. The Gazette reportedly formed part of the basis for major political and legal actions, including measures taken against the Awami League under the country’s Anti-Terrorism Act.
As demands grow for an independent review, the controversy underscores a deeper concern: that in the aftermath of political upheaval, the line between victim and accused may have been blurred, with lasting consequences for justice and accountability.
By Pranab Mondal
Follow us
