The Parliamentary Standing Committee on the Ministry of Law has recommended that the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) include a member from indigenous or disadvantaged communities.
After scrutinising the National Human Rights Commission Bill, 2026, the committee submitted its report to the House this evening. On the same day, the same committee also placed its report on the Transfer of Property (Amendment) Bill, 2026.
Separately, the Standing Committee on the Ministry of Home Affairs presented its report on the Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Bill, 2026.
No significant changes were recommended for either the Transfer of Property (Amendment) Bill, 2026 or the Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Redress Bill, 2026.
Law ministry committee chairman Muhammad Nawshad Zamir tabled the reports on the NHRC and Transfer of Property bills, while home ministry committee chairman Zainul Abedin presented the report on the enforced disappearance bill.
The NHRC Bill originally proposed a commission comprising a chairperson and four commissioners, with one reserved for a woman. The committee has now recommended that, in addition to a woman, one member from ethnic minorities or disadvantaged communities be included.
For the selection committee, the parliamentary body suggested adding the president of the National Press Club or a journalist nominated by him with experience in human rights reporting.
The bill had stipulated that the commission could interrogate any person and, with the approval of the appropriate authority, visit any place, office, court, prison, or detention centre during or after investigations. The committee has recommended removing the phrase “with the approval of the appropriate authority.” If adopted, this would allow the commission to conduct inspections without prior authorisation.
Opposition members of the law and home ministry standing committees boycotted discussions on the bills at their respective committees.
When the standing committee’s report on NHRC bill was proposed, Nazibur Rahman raised objections. He said they had already explained in detail, and submitted in writing to the committee, why they did not participate in the discussions. But this was not mentioned in the committee’s report. Instead, another section said that they had “actively participated.” He objected to this.
In reply, Committee Chairman Zamir said opposition members had indeed made statements before the committee, but they left the chamber before detailed discussions began.
Then Law Minister Md Asaduzzaman remarked: “Inaction is also action. By opposing the bill, they expressed their views.”
Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed added, “Walking out of a standing committee meeting is perhaps unprecedented. If the opposition had submitted their statement as a note of dissent, it would have been included in the report. But they did not.”
Nazibur responded: “Inaction is also action -- that is a matter for the courts, not for the parliament. We submitted written statements, but they were not included in the report. Therefore, the report is incomplete. We demand our statements be incorporated.”
“The opposition members submitted their statements in writing and read them aloud to the committee. This should have been reflected in the report,” Deputy Leader of the Opposition Syed Abdullah Mohammed Taher said.
Later, the home minister told the speaker: “Committee reports do not record who said what. However, the speaker may strike out the word ‘active’.”
After Zainul Abedin presented the report on the enforced disappearance bill, his committee member Nurul Islam Bulbul of Jamaat-e-Islami raised objections. He said they had explained in the meeting why they walked out, so the word “active” was not appropriate.
The speaker responded: “The matter of walking out has been mentioned in the report. The report is now presented.”
