For more than a decade, a powerful political narrative has persisted in Bangladesh: that large numbers of Hefazat-e-Islam supporters were killed when security forces cleared Shapla Chattar in Dhaka on the night of 5–6 May 2013. At various times, claims have ranged from hundreds to even thousands of deaths.

Yet accounts from journalists who were present and information that subsequently emerged point to an important distinction: people died during clashes in Dhaka and elsewhere on 5 and 6 May, but those deaths and the late-night operation to clear Shapla Chattar were not necessarily the same event.

Former BBC Bangla head Sabir Mustafa has said that BBC journalists found no evidence of a mass killing during the actual night-time clearance operation at Shapla Chattar.

According to Mustafa, BBC correspondent Kadir Kallol was at the scene that night and remained in regular contact with the BBC team in London. He did not report witnessing people being shot dead during the clearance operation, bodies resulting from such shootings, or blood on the streets.

That does not mean nobody died during the events of 5–6 May. Fatalities occurred during violent clashes in different parts of Dhaka and subsequently elsewhere in Bangladesh. The distinction has now become particularly important because, 13 years later, former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and 40 others are facing allegations of crimes against humanity arising from the events.

The fundamental question is therefore: What evidence establishes killings during the specific night-time operation to clear Shapla Chattar? And are deaths occurring during clashes elsewhere being conflated with the clearance operation itself?

From Rally to Violence Hefazat-e-Islam organised a major gathering in Dhaka on 5 May 2013 in support of its 13-point programme. Large numbers of madrasa teachers, students and supporters travelled to the capital. As the day progressed, serious violence erupted around Paltan, Motijheel, Baitul Mukarram and other parts of Dhaka. Trees were cut down, shops and other properties were set on fire, infrastructure was damaged and protesters clashed with law-enforcement agencies. The then-main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party supported Hefazat's programme. People died during the broader violence that day and in subsequent clashes elsewhere. But a different claim became politically dominant afterwards: that security forces carried out a large-scale killing when they cleared Shapla Chattar late that night. It is this specific allegation that requires closer scrutiny. A BBC Journalist Was at the Scene Sabir Mustafa served for many years as head of the BBC Bengali Service and was on duty in London on the night of the operation. According to his account, BBC correspondent Kadir Kallol remained at Shapla Chattar until the early hours while maintaining contact with colleagues in London. At the same time, extraordinary claims were spreading through social media: hundreds had allegedly been killed, bodies removed in trucks and blood washed from the streets. Mustafa says the BBC repeatedly checked these claims with its journalist on the ground. He did not report witnessing a mass killing at Shapla Chattar. Mustafa has nevertheless made another point equally clear: people did die in clashes on 5 and 6 May, and the BBC reported those fatalities. The question, therefore, is not whether anyone died during the events of those two days. The question is whether people were killed during the specific night-time operation to clear Shapla Chattar. Does the Presence of Bodies Prove They Were Killed There? There is another important complication. Bodies of individuals killed during earlier clashes were reportedly brought to the Shapla Chattar gathering before the clearance operation. Human Rights Watch's 2013 investigation also referred to bodies of people killed earlier being brought to the square. The presence of bodies at Shapla Chattar therefore does not by itself establish that those individuals were killed there during the night-time operation. Human Rights Watch nevertheless alleged excessive use of force by security agencies during the broader events of 5–6 May and estimated that at least 58 people, including members of the security forces, died across the wider violence. At the same time, it regarded Hefazat's much higher casualty claims as exaggerated and found some opposition claims lacking credibility. This is why two questions must remain separate: How many people died during the overall violence in Dhaka and elsewhere on 5–6 May? And: How many people were killed during the operation to clear Shapla Chattar itself? Conflating the two risks distorting both history and the judicial process. Where Did the ‘Shapla Chattar Massacre’ Narrative Come From? Immediately after the operation, extraordinary casualty figures began circulating. Claims were made that hundreds or even thousands had been killed and that bodies had been removed in trucks. But allegations of a massacre on such a scale inevitably raise basic evidentiary questions. Who were those killed? What were their names? Where are their families? Where are the hospital and morgue records? Where is the photographic or video evidence showing them being killed at Shapla Chattar? Which security force killed them? These questions are central to Sabir Mustafa's account as well. According to him, a credible list identifying those allegedly killed during the night-time Shapla Chattar operation was not produced when such claims were examined. Again, this does not mean there were no deaths during the violence of 5–6 May. It means deaths during daytime clashes and the late-night Shapla Chattar clearance operation need to be examined separately. Forty-One People Now Accused Thirteen years later, proceedings before Bangladesh's International Crimes Tribunal name former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and 40 others. The accused include former ministers and Awami League leaders, former inspectors general of police, senior police and RAB officers, a former BGB director general, journalists and intellectuals. Such a broad list inevitably raises another question: Is there specific evidence establishing the individual criminal responsibility of each defendant, or is collective responsibility being inferred from their positions within the former government and state apparatus? Crimes against humanity are among the gravest criminal allegations possible. The seriousness of the charge therefore demands correspondingly strong evidence. BGB's Role and the Case of General Aziz Ahmed The position of then-Border Guard Bangladesh Director General General (Retired) Aziz Ahmed provides one example of why individual responsibility matters. General Aziz, who later became Bangladesh's Chief of Army Staff, is listed as the 26th accused among the 41 defendants. But there are significant questions concerning BGB's role in the actual Shapla Chattar clearance operation. Material provided to The Source News Bangla states that the decision to clear the square was made at a meeting at Police Headquarters. Police led the operation with assistance from the Rapid Action Battalion, while BGB remained available as a standby force. According to the material, BGB personnel were primarily deployed to protect strategic installations near Shapla Chattar, including the Bangladesh Secretariat, Bangladesh Bank and Bangabhaban, and did not participate in the main clearance operation. Human Rights Watch's 2013 investigation similarly reported, based on witness accounts, that BGB personnel remained behind police and RAB units and did not take part in the actual clearance operation. The material provided to The Source News Bangla further claims that General Aziz was not present at meetings planning the clearance operation and did not personally participate in it. It also states that when a complaint was initially filed before the International Crimes Tribunal on behalf of Hefazat-e-Islam in April 2025, his name was not included, but he was subsequently added as an accused. These claims are matters to be tested through evidence and counter-evidence in court. If prosecutors possess documents, testimony, orders or other material establishing General Aziz's individual or command responsibility, those should be presented and scrutinised through a fair judicial process. The issue has acquired additional significance because authorities have sought Interpol assistance to return him to Bangladesh to face trial. But this is not ultimately about General Aziz alone. For every one of the 41 accused, prosecutors should be able to demonstrate what that individual did, what decisions they participated in, what instructions they gave, or how they were personally connected to the alleged crimes. Holding a senior position, serving under a particular government or having a particular political association is not, by itself, evidence of a crime. Interpol Enters the Process The current BNP government has sought international cooperation to return several former government and security officials who are abroad. The government has said that it formally requested former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's extradition from India and sought an Interpol Red Notice against her. International assistance has also been sought regarding former Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal and others. Former Inspector General of Police Benazir Ahmed is also subject to an Interpol Red Notice, and Bangladesh has pursued his return. Interpol assistance is now also being sought in relation to defendants in the Shapla Chattar proceedings. An important distinction should nevertheless be understood: an Interpol Red Notice is not an international arrest warrant. It is a request to law-enforcement authorities around the world to locate an individual and potentially provisionally arrest that person pending extradition or similar legal proceedings. Each country decides what action to take under its own laws. Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution also prohibits the organisation from undertaking activities of a political, military, religious or racial character. Submitting a request to Interpol and Interpol approving that request are therefore not the same thing. The legal and evidentiary basis of the allegations matters. Two Different Events on the Same Day Perhaps the central problem in the long-running Shapla Chattar controversy is that two related but distinct events have frequently been merged into a single narrative. First, violent clashes occurred in different parts of Dhaka on 5 May and subsequently elsewhere. People died. Second, security forces removed the remaining Hefazat supporters from Shapla Chattar late that night. Fatalities in the first series of events are documented. But if the second event itself is to be characterised as the “Shapla Chattar massacre” or a “genocide,” that specific allegation requires specific evidence. Who was killed there? How many? Where were their bodies recovered? What caused their deaths? Which security force fired the fatal shots? Who gave the orders? Thirteen years later, if individuals are to face allegations as serious as crimes against humanity, these questions must be answered through evidence—not political narratives or assumptions. The Political Context of 2013 Matters Too The events at Shapla Chattar cannot be entirely separated from Bangladesh's wider political environment in 2013. Trials relating to crimes committed during the 1971 Liberation War were under way. The Shahbag movement had mobilised large sections of society demanding the highest punishment for convicted war criminals and expressing support for the secular ideals associated with the Liberation War. Hefazat-e-Islam, meanwhile, emerged with a 13-point programme. Several of its demands concerning relations between men and women, religious offences, sculpture and public life caused serious concern among Bangladesh's secular and progressive sections. The events of 5 May were therefore not simply a law-and-order episode. They occurred against a much longer struggle over Bangladesh's national identity, secularism, the legacy of the Liberation War and religion-based politics. But political context, however important, cannot substitute for evidence of a crime. Justice Must Be Served—But History Must Not Be Rewritten Bangladesh emerged through the 1971 Liberation War with aspirations built around secularism, human dignity, justice and the rule of law. Those principles require something quite straightforward. If someone committed a crime, that person should face justice—whether a former prime minister, minister, military or police officer, journalist or political leader. But political identity cannot become a substitute for evidence of criminal guilt. Likewise, if people died during clashes in Dhaka and elsewhere on 5–6 May 2013, those deaths can and should be investigated. But deaths occurring during those wider clashes should not, without evidence, be transformed into proof of a massacre during the late-night Shapla Chattar clearance operation. Thirteen years later, therefore, the most important question surrounding this case may not be the identities of the 41 accused. It is a question that comes before all of them:

Who, precisely, was killed at Shapla Chattar during that night-time operation?

If the state intends to prosecute 41 people for crimes against humanity arising from that operation, a credible, verifiable and evidence-based answer to that question should be where the judicial process begins.

The Source News Bangla | Investigation & Analysis