Adilur Rahman Khan, a prominent name in Bangladesh’s human rights arena since 2013, has been a subject of intense scrutiny and debate. As the Secretary of the human rights non-governmental organization Odhikar, Khan has been vocal about Awami League government’s actions and policies. However, his affiliations and actions during his tenure as the Deputy Attorney General during the BNP-Jamaat rule (2001-2007) have raised serious questions about his motives, intentions and integrity.
Under Khan’s leadership, Odhikar is said to be involved in reporting, advocacy, and fact-finding on sensitive violations in Bangladesh. While the organization claims to champion human rights, its activities have often been seen as politically motivated, leading to accusations of it being an anti-State entity.
During the BNP-Jamaat’s rule in Bangladesh, journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury faced a harrowing ordeal when a false case under sedition, treason and blasphemy was brought against him. His outspoken views and criticisms, particularly regarding madrassas and their potential role in fostering militancy, drew the ire of powerful figures in the government. Despite international outcry and support for Choudhury, he was imprisoned, and his pleas for justice were repeatedly stifled. This period marked a dark chapter in Bangladesh’s history, highlighting the challenges faced by journalists and free thinkers in the country.
During the BNP-Jamaat rule in Bangladesh, journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury faced false charged of sedition, treason and blasphemy. Choudhury’s mother passed away in 2004 while he was imprisoned. Despite being granted parole by the court to attend her funeral, Adilur Rahman Khan’s opposition ensured that Choudhury remained behind bars, missing his mother’s last rites. Choudhury stated, “My mother died on August 9, 2004. I was not allowed to attend her janaja despite issuance of bail on parole. It was Adilur Rahman Khan and influential leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami who pressured the Home Ministry not to allow me to attend my mother’s janaza (funeral).”
Choudhury further added that Khan opposed his bail petitions on a numerous occasions, stating that he had tarnished Bangladesh’s image by claiming madrassas were breeding grounds for militancy and had defamed Muslims by praising Jews and Christians. He has also committed unforgivable crime by demanding normalization of relations between Bangladesh and Israel. However, many countries, including the US, UK, European Union, and Australia, passed resolutions in favor of Choudhury, recognizing his plight and the injustices he faced.
Realizing the international support for Choudhury, a man who couldn’t be silenced, and the potential consequences of opposing such a widely supported figure, Adilur Rahman Khan slightly stepped back from the case. Yet, today, Khan is often portrayed as a staunch human rights defender, with many overlooking his past actions where he abused his power and was complicit in human rights violations in Bangladesh and openly showed his bias towards radical Islam, religious hatred and anti-Semitism.
Khan’s actions and affiliations are politically motivated, aiming to bring his party, Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), back to power. His criticisms and reports, while presented under the guise of human rights advocacy, often align with the BNP’s political agenda. This has led many to question the authenticity of his claims and the true intentions behind his activism.
While today Adilur Rahman Khan remains a recognized figure in Bangladesh’s socio-political landscape, his past actions and affiliations cast a shadow over his portrayal as a human rights champion. As Bangladesh continues to navigate its complex political dynamics, figures like Khan will remain at the center of debates and discussions.
