The US State Department issued a global report on March 20 -- styled as “2022 Country Report on Human Rights practices” -- that tracks human rights situations across the world. The report triggered backlash -- as countries alleged the methodology of the report was flawed.
The report features Bangladesh's human rights situation prominently -- and catalogs the accusations against the country. The US imposing extensive sanctions on RAB (Rapid Action Battalion) on the grounds of alleged gross violations of human rights and the exclusion of Bangladesh from the 1st Democratic Summit communicated the US's displeasure with Bangladesh.
Critics suggest that human right is a mere camouflage to pressurize Bangladesh. Bangladesh has deepened ties with China -- an issue that invited ire and attention. The allegation against Bangladesh about its human rights violation is seen as coercion to send Bangladesh a clear message.
The section on Bangladesh focuses on the issues of the right to peaceful assembly and organization, protection of refugees, religious freedom, social oppression and discrimination, arbitrary detention, and extrajudicial killing.
Bangladesh questioned the report and dubbed it as one-sided. The report could spark renewed tensions in bilateral ties between the two nations; United States-Bangladesh relations have been stabilized after a period of uncertainty following the imposition of sanctions on RAB.
The data collection process relied on the reports of the NGOs which are mostly funded by donors and thus could have conflicting interests -- talks of bias thus are not far-fetched. To sustain their funding sources, the reports offered by these NGOs often magnify the human rights violations and the degree of violence could be blown out of proportion.
The methodology of data collection has also come under scrutiny. There lacks any uniform methodology shared among the NGOs, which makes the data collection process inconsistent and haphazard. The methodology that the local NGOs employ diverges from the methods applied in the United States.
Given the questionable human rights situation in the United States as well, the US' moral authority in promoting human rights is dubious.
There was a clear lack of consultation with the countries before issuing the report -- even though many countries that the report railed against include allies of the United States.
Before the issuance of the report, no justifications had been sought and alternative viewpoints had not been accommodated.
This makes the report very “one-sided.” For any report to be considered legitimate, objectivity needs to be ensured.
To restore a degree of credibility in its human rights and to lend credence to its lofty rhetoric as a defender of human rights, the United States needs to recalibrate its image and also needs to focus on its domestic arena.
Mehjabin Maliha Hossain is an international affairs researcher.
