Published: 12:04 AM, 11 September 2026
RAB abolition bill passed amid opposition
A bill to form a new specialized unit under police -- styled the Special Response Battalion (SRB) -- and dissolve the controversial Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) has been passed in parliament despite objections from Opposition leaders.
As the legislation provides for transferring RAB's personnel, assets, documents, facilities, funds, and liabilities to the new unit, Opposition members accused the government of essentially keeping the same force under a new brand.
Some described it as "old wine in a new bottle" and demanded that the bill undergo further scrutiny and stakeholder consultations, bdnews24 reports.
Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmad, however, said the new battalion was formed specifically through the dissolution of RAB and that the SRB has "no link" with the former unit.
The Special Response Battalion (SRB) Bill 2026 was passed by voice vote in parliament on Thursday following lengthy debates and clause-by-clause consideration.
Earlier, parliament rejected opposition proposals to send the bill for public opinion polling and to a scrutiny committee.
The parliament also rejected two amendments proposed by independent MP Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Iqbal over the bill's preamble and Section 24 by voice vote.
What is in the SRB Bill
The bill stipulates that a specialised unit named the "Special Response Battalion" will operate under the police force.
The unit will be formed by deploying or deputing personnel from police, other disciplined forces, and a designated number of officers, armed personnel, and staff as deemed necessary by the government.
The rank structure, recruitment procedures, and service terms for the unit's officers, armed personnel, and employees will be determined through rules.
The SRB will have its own flag, emblem, and uniform. An officer holding at least the rank of additional inspector general of police will serve as the director general of the SRB.
The legislation includes provisions to transfer RAB's manpower, orders, powers, authority, existing facilities, funds, cash and bank balances, liabilities, contracts, movable and immovable properties, registers, records, and documents to the SRB.
Until new regulations are framed under the legislation, departmental disciplinary actions and ongoing tribunal proceedings regarding RAB will remain in force under existing rules.
The SRB has been granted powers to investigate criminal offences, conduct searches, make arrests, and seize property.
Provisions have also been made for the unit to maintain its own lock-ups, evidence rooms, and interrogation rooms.
To address public grievances and internal complaints among unit members, a Grievance Redress Committee will be established, chaired by an additional director general of the unit.
'Passing this in Four Working Days is Unacceptable'
Nurul Islam, a Jamaat-e-Islami MP representing Chapainawabganj-3, highlighted that RAB faces serious allegations of human rights violations, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings.
He opposed rushing through legislation to form a new unit in place of such a force within just four working days.
"We hold a sense of dread regarding RAB. It has committed human rights violations and added a new dimension to enforced disappearances and killings across Bangladesh," he said. "Bringing a bill like this to be passed in haste within barely four working days without proper debate is completely unacceptable."
The Jamaat MP demanded further consultations with victims, criminal defence lawyers, human rights organisations, and other stakeholders.
He also questioned the independence of the SRB's Grievance Redress Committee, proposing instead an independent committee headed by a former member of the judiciary.
Moreover, he called for clearer provisions regarding where detained individuals will be held by the SRB and proposed that a full list of all SRB facilities and offices be published in the official gazette.
'Only the Signboard is Changing'
Pabna-1 Jamaat MP Najibur Rahman raised concerns over Section 27 of the SRB Bill, pointing out that RAB's personnel, offices, powers, records, assets, contracts, and liabilities are being transferred wholesale to the new force.
"In effect, only the signboard is changing; it is old wine in a new bottle. Nothing is changing except RAB's name -- everything else remains identical," he argued.
He expressed fear that transferring records in this manner could compromise ongoing investigations and court cases concerning past crimes attributed to RAB, including enforced disappearances.
'The Demand was for Dissolution, Not Creating Another Force'
Opposition leader Shafiqur Rahman said that while there was a widespread demand to abolish RAB, no one had asked for the creation of another identical force.
"The dissolution of this force was everyone's demand. Begum Khaleda Zia spoke about this repeatedly, as did local and international human rights organisations."
The Jamaat chief alleged that RAB's manpower, infrastructure, and logistics are being kept virtually unchanged under the new law.
He also raised a recent incident in parliament concerning the alleged attempted abduction of a former Jagannath University student by RAB personnel, arguing it demonstrated that the behaviour of the force's members has not changed.
"They remain just as they were before. Personnel from that same force are being transferred to the same roles. Their facilities, logistics, and manpower will all stay the same," he added.
Shafiqur urged the government to clarify the necessity of the SRB to the public first.
"Let the justification for such a force become clearer. Let the nation feel that we require a specialised force of this nature. Let the nation be convinced."
Urging the parliament not to pass the bill during the current session, he concluded: "I believe this law should under no circumstances be passed, and it needs to be withdrawn."
'It Has No Connection with RAB'
Responding to opposition objections, the home minister said that dissolving RAB was one of the government's electoral pledges.
He argued that the longer the bill's passage is delayed, the longer RAB will continue to exist.
The minister rejected claims that the bill had not been adequately debated, explaining that it had been posted on the ministry's website for public feedback, submitted to the parliamentary standing committee for discussion after being tabled, and debated extensively in parliament regarding opposition notes of dissent.
Addressing objections to the Grievance Redress Committee under Section 24, Salahuddin clarified that the committee would not investigate criminal offences. Instead, it is designed to resolve external complaints against unit members or internal administrative grievances.
If any member of the force commits a criminal offence, action will be taken under existing laws, he added.
He rejected the proposal to appoint a former High Court judge to head the committee, maintaining that it is an internal departmental and administrative matter.
In response to questions about where detainees would be held, the minister noted that the bill explicitly mandates handing over arrested individuals to the nearest police station "without delay".
