There couldn’t be a more harrowing indictment of India’s ruthless border policy than the recent killings of two Bangladeshis around the 14th anniversary of the murder of Felani Khatun. The first of these killings involved Zahur Ali, 55, who was allegedly beaten to death by members of the Indian Border Security Force (BSF) and local Indian citizens at the Boro Keora border area of Chunarughat, Habiganj. According to a report by Prothom Alo, Zahur, a security guard from Dhaka with a history of mental instability, had recently returned home on a five-day leave. On January 6, he went out apparently to sell some merchandise at the village market and was not heard from again. The next day, his body was discovered inside Indian territory.
The second incident involved Saidul Islam, 23, who was allegedly killed by BSF on January 8 near the Mashimpur border in Bishwambharpur, Sunamganj. According to a report by Dhaka Tribune, Saidul was apparently smuggling betel nuts into India when he was shot, sustaining wounds to his chest and abdomen. He later died at the Sunamganj Sadar Hospital. And just three days after that, another victim, Md Shahidul Islam, 22, was critically injured near the border in Shibganj, Chapainawabganj. Prothom Alo reports that Shahidul was apparently returning from India with smuggled Phensedyl when BSF shot him. He is now under treatment at Rajshahi Medical College Hospital.
If this was India’s way of commemorating the incident from 14 years ago that gave rise to that iconic image of the upside-down body of a 14-year-old girl hanging from a barbed-wire fence for hours—before she was shot and left to die a slow, painful death—it indeed made its point. However, the recent string of tragic shootings has nothing to do with Felani, who was just another entrant in the absurdly long list of BSF victims. But that haunting image today stands as a symbol of BSF’s trigger-happy exploits that continue unchecked. The ordeal that Felani’s family had to go through, both before and after the January 7, 2011 shooting, represents everything wrong with India’s border policy. It starts with allowing lethal force to prevent unlawful movements regardless of their causes or its own “zero-death” pledge—with 25 shot dead in 2024, according to Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK), adding to the 594 BSF killings recorded between 2009 and 2023. And then, it continues to extend undue protections to those guilty of these killings.
Just consider how the BSF member who killed Felani has been treated. According to a recent report by The Daily Star, he remains unpunished to this day. Initial investigations by a BSF special court acquitted him of any wrongdoing, and a second trial again upheld the verdict, despite widespread criticism and overwhelming evidence of his reckless actions. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of India, which was supposed to hear final arguments in this case on January 8, reportedly postponed the hearing without explanation. Furthermore, despite India’s National Human Rights Commission directing the Indian home ministry in 2013 to provide Rs 5 lakh as compensation to Felani’s family, that payment has yet to be made, according to an Indian rights activist monitoring the case.
India’s default response to concerns over such killings is to allude to cross-border crimes—such as smuggling, trafficking, and movements of criminals—as if the ends justify the means. After his meeting with Foreign Secretary Md Jashim Uddin on Sunday, where Dhaka objected to the recent “unauthorised” fence construction attempts and ongoing border killings, Indian High Commissioner to Bangladesh Pranay Verma stuck to the same guns. The BSF also routinely uses the excuse of firing in “self-defence” under “compulsion.” In July 2022, its then director-general even went as far as to call Bangladeshi nationals killed at the border “criminals.” Rights activists have consistently laid bare the hollowness of such arguments about the means or excuses used to stop so-called border crimes, yet Indian authorities refuse to mend their ways or ensure accountability for what is clearly a violation of both internationally accepted border control protocols and bilateral instruments.
This authoritarian tendency was further evident in BSF’s recent attempts to construct barbed-wire fences along five border areas, including Chapainawabganj, Naogaon, Lalmonirhat, and the Tin Bigha Corridor. India has already fenced 3,271 km of its 4,156-km border with Bangladesh, leaving approximately 885 km unfenced. While it has temporarily halted its border incursions thanks to strong resistance from Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) personnel and local villagers, its increasingly adversarial approach since the ouster of New Delhi’s once-favoured leader Sheikh Hasina stands in stark contrast to its rhetoric of friendly relations. The question is, who surrounds their neighbours with barbed wire, frequently violates bilateral agreements on border management, resorts to excessive force at the slightest hint of unauthorised presence or activity, and continuously refuses to engage in accountability measures?
Interestingly, Pranay Verma, while talking to journalists after the Sunday meeting, said: “We have an understanding with regard to fencing the border for security… We expect that the understanding will be implemented.” He was likely referring to what Home Affairs Adviser Lt Gen (retired) Jahangir Alam Chowdhury termed as “unequal agreements” or MoUs on barbed-wire fencing signed during Awami League’s tenure, leading to the present disputes. Revisiting all such controversial MoUs has become essential in post-uprising Bangladesh, even though India still seems to be tethered to a time when it could get Bangladesh to concede to any unfair demand using its political leverage. But that belongs to the past now. India can no longer expect undue concessions or unequal opportunities when it comes to border management. It must acknowledge that true friendship between two neighbours demands respect, accountability, and adherence to established protocols and agreements, not coercion or exploitation.
There have been four border-related treaties signed since Bangladesh’s independence, as the home adviser has said. Of them, the 1975 one specifies that no defence development activities can take place within 150 yards of the zero line, with another MoU adding that any such work will “require prior agreement between the two nations.” There have also been repeated commitments from the Indian authorities to pursue a non-lethal strategy in combating border crimes. India must honour these agreements and commitments. Also, the extrajudicial killings of so many Bangladeshis by BSF cannot go unanswered. India faces too many unresolved issues with Bangladesh—including Sheikh Hasina’s extradition—to allow these manageable crises to fester unnecessarily. But if it continues its uncooperative stance, the government should consider taking the issue to the international court and actively raising it on global platforms. Protecting the lives of our citizens and our border integrity is non-negotiable.
Daily Star
