Lawyers representing former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina have asked the United Nations human rights office to publicly correct its estimate of deaths during the July–August 2024 unrest, arguing that later official Bangladeshi records reveal a significant discrepancy in the casualty figures used in one of the country’s most consequential political investigations.
Lawyers acting for former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina have asked the United Nations human rights office to publicly correct its estimate of deaths during the July-August 2024 upheaval, arguing that later official Bangladesh records expose a major gap in the casualty figure used to frame one of the country’s most consequential political investigations.
In a letter dated May 28 and addressed to U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk, British barrister Steven Powles KC challenged the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) over its February 2025 fact-finding report on the violence that preceded the collapse of Hasina’s government.
Powles described it as “of serious concern that a UN report has arrived at a conclusion that diverges so far from the truth” and requested a correction and public retraction of the reported death toll. According to news agency reports, the letter argues that inaccurate casualty figures were used to reinforce a political narrative against Hasina and the Awami League government.
The legal challenge comes at a politically sensitive time in Bangladesh. The country is now governed by Prime Minister Tarique Rahman’s Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) government, which assumed office following the February 2026 election. The election took place after the political transition overseen by the former Muhammad Yunus-led interim administration, during which the Awami League was barred from contesting. In the absence of the Awami League, the BNP secured a two-thirds parliamentary majority, while Jamaat-e-Islami emerged as the principal opposition party.
Challenge to U.N. casualty estimate
The OHCHR report, published on Feb. 12, 2025, examined violence and alleged human rights violations between July 1 and Aug. 15, 2024. The investigation was launched after Yunus, then chief adviser of the interim government, formally invited the U.N. human rights office to conduct a fact-finding mission in a letter dated Aug. 28, 2024.
According to the report, OHCHR assessed information from government agencies, civil society organizations, witnesses, medical records and open-source materials. It concluded that “as many as 1,400 people could have been killed during the protests,” with the detailed casualty assessment focusing primarily on deaths recorded between July 15 and Aug. 5.
The report stated that Bangladesh’s Ministry of Health had recorded 841 deaths at the time the report was finalized. OHCHR said it considered that figure incomplete after Bangladesh’s National Security Intelligence agency submitted information on 314 additional individuals allegedly killed during the unrest who were not included in the ministry’s database. Following a review of multiple lists and the removal of duplicate entries, the U.N. office arrived at its estimate of up to 1,400 deaths.
Hasina’s legal team disputes that methodology and argues that official records subsequently published by the same administration that invited the investigation present a substantially different picture.
On Jan. 16, 2025, Bangladesh’s Ministry of Liberation War Affairs published its first official gazette listing 834 people recognized as martyrs of the July–August uprising. The gazette, signed by Deputy Secretary Haridas Thakur, included names, addresses and medical case identification numbers.
The list later underwent revisions. According to reporting by Prothom Alo in August 2025, ten additional names were added in June, increasing the total to 844. Subsequently, eight names were removed after questions emerged regarding duplication and whether some individuals had directly participated in the uprising. The official total at that stage stood at 836, while the ministry continued verification efforts.
The Ministry of Liberation War Affairs website now contains additional martyr gazettes, including one dated March 16, 2026, indicating that the official documentation process continued after publication of the initial list cited in the lawyers’ submission. The latest cumulative figure could not immediately be independently confirmed from publicly available records.
The distinction is significant because OHCHR’s figure represented an estimate of protest-related deaths compiled from multiple sources, while the government gazette served as an official recognition list connected to compensation and state benefits for designated martyr families. The two records were not necessarily compiled for identical legal or administrative purposes.
Report documented abuses by multiple actors
The OHCHR report made serious allegations regarding the conduct of the former government during the unrest. At the same time, the report also documented violence directed at Awami League members, police officers and religious minorities following Hasina’s removal from office.
According to OHCHR, attacks intensified after Aug. 5, 2024, with Awami League offices and residences targeted, police installations burned and individuals assaulted or killed.
The report cited Bangladesh Police figures showing that 44 police officers were killed and 2,308 injured between July 1 and Aug. 15. It also noted that the Awami League submitted a detailed list alleging that 144 party officials and activists were killed during the period.
OHCHR further recorded attacks on Hindu, Ahmadiyya, Buddhist and Christian places of worship between Aug. 5 and Aug. 15 and stated that it continued to receive reports of abuses against religious and Indigenous communities beyond the period covered by its investigation.
Hasina’s legal team argues that these findings received considerably less international attention than the allegations directed at her government. The lawyers contend that the limited investigation period prevented a fuller examination of violence against Awami League supporters and minority communities following the installation of the Yunus administration on Aug. 8, 2024.
Questions over the interim administration’s role
The lawyers have also questioned whether an investigation initiated at the request of the Yunus administration could adequately examine allegations involving individuals and groups associated with the political transition.
OHCHR noted in its report that Yunus first discussed the matter with Türk during a phone conversation on Aug. 14, 2024, before issuing the formal invitation later that month. The U.N. office described its investigation as independent and impartial and thanked the interim government for facilitating access to officials and information.
The legal submission reportedly argues that the inquiry did not sufficiently address the political interests of the interim administration or the actions of its allies during the transfer of power.
The issue received additional attention after remarks made by Türk during an interview with BBC HARDtalk host Stephen Sackur on March 5, 2025.
Türk stated that the U.N. had warned the Bangladesh Army that, if it became involved in suppressing protesters, Bangladesh could risk losing its status as a troop-contributing country to U.N. peacekeeping operations.
“We actually gave the warning to the army … they may not be allowed to be a troop-contributing country anymore,” Türk said. “As a result, we saw changes.”
The Bangladesh Army later rejected the suggestion that it had received such a direct warning. In a statement issued through the Inter Services Public Relations Directorate on March 10, 2025, the military said that any concerns raised by the U.N. would have been communicated to the government of the time rather than directly to army leadership. The statement further said that Türk’s comments could misrepresent the army’s role and damage its reputation.
Ongoing debate over casualty figures
The central issue raised in Powles’ letter concerns the casualty estimate itself. Although OHCHR did not state that exactly 1,400 people were killed, its estimate that “as many as 1,400 people could have been killed” became one of the most frequently cited descriptions of the 2024 uprising.
That figure has subsequently appeared in political statements, international reporting and legal discussions relating to former members of the Hasina administration.
Hasina’s legal team argues that subsequent official records raise questions about the estimate and warrant further review by the U.N. rights office. The lawyers contend that any significant discrepancy between the estimate and later government documentation should be publicly addressed.
The disagreement underscores broader debates over how deaths associated with the 2024 political upheaval should be documented and interpreted, particularly given the differing methodologies employed by international investigators and Bangladeshi government agencies.
As of publication, OHCHR had not publicly responded to the reported May 28 letter, and there was no indication that the U.N. rights office had initiated a review or revision of its findings.
