STAFF CORRESPONDENT

The government presented wrong information in parliament to justify the repeal of NHRC-related ordinances, the “immediate past” commissioners of the National Human Rights Commission alleged yesterday.

In an open letter, they said the government’s real motive behind the repeal was to curb the NHRC’s independence, and warned that the move could put victims of enforced disappearances and participants in the July uprising at serious risk.

They also said that under the reinstated NHRC act of 2009, security forces would be responsible for investigating allegations of their own human rights violations.

Contacted by The Daily Star, Law Minister Md Asaduzzaman, however, said all the points made in the open letter were “based on misconceptions and are incorrect”.

Meanwhile, the reinstatement of the 2009 act has created confusion over the commission’s current status.

On April 9, parliament repealed three ordinances related to the NHRC, passed between 2024 and 2025, and reinstated the 2009 law enacted during the Awami League era.

The repealed ordinances are the National Human Rights Commission (Amendment) Ordinance, 2024; the National Human Rights Commission Ordinance, 2025; and the National Human Rights Commission (Amendment) Ordinance, 2025.

Justice Moyeenul Islam Chowdhury, Nur Khan, Ilira Dewan, Prof Md Shariful Islam, and Nabila Idris said their roles as commissioners ceased to exist following the repeal.

“Since the ordinances have been repealed, we are no longer serving,” Nur Khan told this newspaper, replying to a query about why they described themselves as “immediate past” in the open letter.

Asked about their status now, he explained, “We did not resign, and the government did not ask us to resign…. The status is -- when the law under which we were appointed is repealed, we cease to exist.

“We have no relation to the 2009 law as our appointments were made in line with the 2025 ordinance.”

Under the 2009 act, the selection committee for appointing the NHRC chairperson and commissioners was dominated by the ruling party. It was chaired by the then Speaker and included the home minister, the chairman of the law commission, the cabinet secretary, and one member each from the ruling and opposition parties.

The interim government, however, changed this process through an ordinance. Under it, the committee would be chaired by a judge of the Appellate Division nominated by the chief justice.

Other members included the cabinet secretary, one ruling party MP, one opposition MP, a university professor, a citizen representative, a journalist representative, and a representative of minority ethnic groups.

The interim government reconstituted the commission following the promulgation of the ordinance in November last year.

OPEN LETTER; MINISTER’S RESPONSE

The open letter, issued by commissioners who described themselves as “immediate past”, responded to what they called incorrect information

SEE PAGE 2 COL 1