Unmasking 'disturbingly methodical' machinery of enforced disappearances
The agencies involved in the disappearances created a web of confusion at every stage – from targeting victims to surveillance, abduction, and detention – deliberately acting in a way that obscured their actions to keep them beyond legal accountability
The practice of enforced disappearances, infamously referred to as "goom culture", which victimised thousands during the past 15 years of the Awami League regime, was "systematically designed" by the involved law enforcement agencies to remain undetectable, the Inquiry Commission on Enforced Disappearances has found.
According to the report by the commission submitted to the chief adviser on 14 December, the agencies involved in the disappearances created a web of confusion at every stage – from targeting victims to surveillance, abduction, and detention – deliberately acting in a way that obscured their actions to keep them beyond legal accountability.
The report revealed that agencies targeted victims based on names extracted from the testimonies of tortured detainees, as well as through direct orders from politically connected or otherwise influential figures.
In many cases, victims were placed under surveillance, with their locations tracked and pinpointed using mobile technology employed by the agencies, the inquiry commission noted.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
The report also provided detailed accounts of detention centres scattered across the country, the brutal methods of torture inflicted on victims, and how many were killed, with their bodies subsequently disposed of.
The report finds that the RAB, DB, and Counter Terrorism and Transnational Crimes (CTTC) were identified by victims, witnesses, and family members as the primary perpetrators in most cases of enforced disappearances.
Other actors were also implicated, including the DGFI and the National Security Intelligence (NSI).
The interim government formed the inquiry commission to look into the allegations of enforced disappearances, which was used as a repressive tool to suppress opposition voices in the country during the Awami League government.
Deceptive tactics and fragmented operations
According to the inquiry report, security forces would frequently operate in plain clothes and falsely attribute their actions to other agencies. If the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI) was operating, they would claim to be the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB); if it was RAB, they would claim to be the Detective Branch (DB), etc, the report says.
The forces would also exchange victims amongst themselves, with one force abducting, another incarcerating, the third one killing or releasing the victims.
Moreover, the report mentions that even when it was a single force carrying out an enforced disappearance, the operations were deliberately segmented. As a result, even individuals directly involved in victim elimination teams often lacked knowledge of who they were eliminating or the broader context of the operations. Only the highranking officers possessed the total information.
Additionally, the frequent rotation of teams, the blending of jurisdictions, and the lack of clear operational boundaries compounded the clandestine nature of the crime, the commission reports.
'Prime minister is giving you a second chance'
The report identifies two primary methods of target selection, with the first being a network-based system. In this approach, detainees are often subjected to torture to extract the names of others. These individuals are then apprehended, tortured, and coerced into providing additional names, creating a cascading chain of victims.
This process resulted in many innocent individuals, named by tortured victims desperate to escape their suffering, becoming targets of enforced disappearance.
The second method of target selection appears to involve direct orders from politically connected or otherwise influential figures.
For example, the report mentions, in the notorious seven-murder case in Narayanganj, the accused Tareque Sayeed Mohammad (former RAB 11 Commanding Officer) stated in his confessional statement that he had received the go-ahead signal from Ziaul Ahsan (the then RAB's ADG Operations).
The enforced disappearance victim, Hummam Quader Chowdhury, son of executed war criminal Salauddin Quader Chowdhury, recounted being told at the point of his release: "The honourable prime minister [Sheikh Hasina] is giving you a second chance, but there are certain conditions. You must refrain from politics, leave the country, and return only when the situation improves."
DGFI provided dedicated surveillance systems
The inquiry commission has found that mobile technology was integral to the surveillance process, without which "silent pick-ups" – unobtrusive abductions – were virtually impossible to pinpoint the victim's location with precision.
Prior to the establishment of the National Telecommunication Monitoring Centre (NTMC) as an independent agency, mobile surveillance was conducted through its predecessor, the National Monitoring Centre (NMC), which was housed within the DGFI Headquarters.
The DGFI provided dedicated surveillance systems, which were also used by other forces, such as RAB and DB.
A former DG of the DGFI confirmed to the commission that his organisation provided logistics support related to surveillance to various law enforcement teams whilst NMC was housed at the DGFI Headquarters.
Since the establishment of the NTMC, surveillance activities have transitioned to this independent agency. However, preliminary reports suggest that some surveillance capabilities still reside within individual forces.
Several victims reported signs of surveillance prior to their abductions. For example, one victim revealed that his captors referenced a private phone conversation about his wife's dental treatment, suggesting that mobile surveillance had been conducted beforehand.
Plainclothes 'proshashoner lok' with Hiace model vehicles
The commission said in its report that abductions typically occurred when individuals were approached on the streets or at their homes, usually at night, although not exclusively so. The abductors, oftentimes in plainclothes, identified themselves as "proshashoner lok", law enforcement, or DB or RAB.
Victims were also abducted from ferries, roadsides, or other public areas. They were often called by name before being forcibly pulled into large vehicles, typically 'Hiace' models. Once inside, they were immediately blindfolded, handcuffed, and threatened with weapons. Frequently, torture, such as beatings or electrocution, began almost immediately.
Sometimes, these abductions took place in the presence of others, while in other instances, they occurred in remote locations with no eyewitnesses, making it incredibly difficult to prove what had happened.
Even in crowded cities, abductions were carried out so discreetly that witnesses might not have immediately realised what had occurred.
Mixing legal, illegal detainees together
According to the report, victims were detained for varying periods, ranging from 48–60 hours to several weeks or months, and in some cases, up to eight years. Contrary to the perception that the victims were exclusively held in secret cells, interviews with survivors have revealed that many were detained in cells that also housed legal detainees. An example of this is those detained by DB.
Additionally, there have been instances where the victims were transported within the same facility, moving from illegal cells to legal cells, often timed to coincide with their appearances before courts.
The commission conducted visits to twelve offices of various security forces in Dhaka and Chattogram to inspect interrogation rooms, detention facilities, and equipment. It identified more than eight secret detention facilities operated by agencies such as the DGFI, RAB, and CTTC, where victims were held across the country. At the time of the commission's visits, some of these facilities were still intact, while others had been destroyed.
The commission confirmed that their visited facilities include – Directorate General of Forces Intelligence; Counter Terrorism and Transnational Crime; Detective Branch Headquarters, Dhaka Metropolitan Police; Detective Branch, Chattogram Metropolitan Police; Rapid Action Battalion units 1, 2, 4, 7, and 11, including RAB 2, CPC 3; RAB Forces Headquarters; Chittagong Central Jail; and the National Security Intelligence, Chattogram Division.
Profoundly brutal and disturbingly methodical torture
The Inquiry Commission on Enforced Disappearances has documented torture systems both profoundly brutal and disturbingly methodical. A notable distinction has emerged between the premises under the management of military officers and those overseen by civil forces, such as the police.
In facilities managed by civil forces, such as DB and CTTC, torture was carried out in a manner that integrated it into the daily operations of these offices. The report indicates that although specialised torture equipment was used, the acts of torture were conducted routinely within the same space occupied by the security personnel.
Conversely, the premises controlled by military commanders, such as those managed by RAB and DGFI, exhibited a more specialised infrastructure for torture. These facilities were often equipped with soundproofed chambers and specialised instruments, including mechanised ones, designed explicitly for inflicting physical and psychological harm.
In one instance in 2010, a young man was abducted by RAB from Dhanmondi. He reported that he was taken to a room where his lips were immediately sewn without the use of any anaesthetic. He described the procedure as being akin to stitching cowhide, underscoring the utter dehumanisation inflicted upon him. In a separate incident eight years later, a middleaged man recounted that his genitals and ears were electrocuted. This torture also took place at a RAB facility.
The report says the consistency in torture practices, despite the significant temporal and geographical separation between these cases, strongly suggests that such practices were not only systemic but also institutionalised across these forces.
Killing spots in Buriganga River, Postogola Bridge
In the majority of cases, victims of enforced disappearances have exited the system through either of two channels: they are either killed or they are released into the criminal justice system. A very small minority have been released without any charges being filed against them, as per the report.
For those who were killed, post-mortem examinations revealed that the victims had been shot in the head and disposed of in rivers with cement bags tied to their bodies. Specific sites of killing and disposal include the Buriganga River, Kanchon Bridge, Postogola Bridge etc. The Postogola Bridge location, in particular, had a boat – confiscated during a raid on a pirate den in the Sundarbans – that had been modified for use in these nefarious operations, the inquiry commission found.
The report mentioned that officers were frequently active participants of these executions. One witness, himself a RAB battalion commander, recounted an "orientation" session conducted by the then head of RAB Intelligence Wing, during which two victims were shot on a bridge in front of him as part of his initiation into RAB.
There are also accounts of alternative methods of killing. One soldier reported being ordered to carry a body to a railway line in Dhaka, where it was placed on the tracks. In another instance, a surviving victim described being pushed onto a highway in front of an incoming vehicle by a police officer. By chance, the vehicle swerved and avoided hitting him. The officer, unwilling to make a second attempt, abandoned the effort, sparing the victim's life, the report reads.
Media's failure to question narratives
The report said that after enduring torture, interrogation, and prolonged captivity in secret detention facilities, many victims reported that their captors ultimately admitted they were not involved in any criminal activity. Despite this, the captors justified filing cases against these individuals. To cover up the illegal nature of their enforced disappearance, these victims were then "shown arrested" and implicated in fabricated cases.
Upon their reappearance, individuals were often presented to the media, where fabricated accounts of their alleged offences were shared. These stories were frequently reported in toto by the media without scepticism or scrutiny.
The report said the media's failure to question these implausible narratives, especially as they pertain to terrorism, and its role in perpetuating such practices warrant serious examination to prevent future recurrences.
Interviews with law enforcement officers suggest that their superiors maintained excellent relationships with the media. In some instances, these relationships reportedly included financial transactions, further complicating the impartiality of media reporting in such cases.
Prior to the changeover of 5 August, some victims were released without charges, particularly those who had been subjected to enforced disappearances on multiple occasions, as per the report.
'Hindi-speaking people outside the cell'
According to the report, Indian involvement in Bangladesh's system of enforced disappearances is a matter of public record. There are two highly publicised cases that provide valuable insights into how such operations were carried out: the case of Shukhranjan Bali, abducted from Bangladesh Supreme Court premises who resurfaced subsequently in an Indian jail, and that of BNP leader Salahuddin Ahmed.
Besides these incidents, Hummam Quader Chowdhury describes hearing Hindi-speaking people outside his cell inquiring about the condition of his captivity.
Detained while hiding at Uttara in 2015, BNP leader Salahuddin Ahmed described to the commission being transported to the India-Bangladesh border, where he was handed over to the officials on the Indian side. The formal nature of the handover underscores the high level of coordination between the two Governments and their respective security forces, the report said.
The commission interviewed soldiers deputed to RAB Intelligence to obtain further information about the practice of captive exchanges between the two countries and the possible subsequent fate of the detainees.
One soldier described being present on two occasions circa 2011 when RAB Intelligence received three captives from India via the Tamabil border crossing in the presence of uniformed Indian Border Security Force personnel.
On one occasion, two captives were received and subsequently killed by the side of the road after the exchange. On another occasion, one captive was received and handed over alive to another team inside Bangladesh. In return, RAB Intelligence handed over two captives from Bangladesh to India, as per the report.
