On 18 September 2024, a man named Tofazzal Hossain was seized inside Fazlul Huq Muslim Hall at the University of Dhaka, beaten repeatedly by a group of students who accused him of theft, and died after hours of violence. The image of a crowd deciding guilt and execution without trial was not only shocking; it was a moral and legal rupture.Once again, on 3 July 2025, a violent vigilante attack left three members of a single family dead and another gravely injured in Koroibari, Muradnagar, Cumilla. About 100 to 150 villagers, driven by rumours that the household ran a drug ring and had sheltered a mugger, armed themselves with sticks and knives, pelted a seven-storey house with bricks and stones, and then forced their way inside. These are not isolated cases. Independent reporting, human rights monitors, and recent studies document a sharp rise in mob violence across Bangladesh in the last year: lynchings and mass beatings have occurred in towns, on highways and even on university campuses. This blog examines the role of the state in the surge of mob violence and its obligations to prevent these occurrences.

Incidents of mob violence in Bangladesh have targeted people with no access to due process, the poor, migrants, persons with mental illness and religious or ethnic minorities. Many reports link the surge to a mix of rapid political change and the amplification effect of social media. International bodies and domestic press outlets have repeatedly called for prompt, impartial investigations and for measures to prevent recurrence.Yet over the last year, a disturbing pattern has emerged: neighbours, students, and mobs acting as instant prosecutors, judges and executioners. Rumour outruns investigation. Accusation becomes verdict.

Bangladesh’s constitution promises life, liberty and the protection of law. Those promises are not rhetorical. Article 32 declares that no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty save in accordance with law. Article 31 guarantees protection of law; Article 27 promises equality before the law; Article 35 forbids torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. These are not aspirational slogans. They are legal obligations that bind the state, its agents and, by extension, the communities it serves. Bangladesh has also ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture. When mobs commit lynching or brutal beatings, and police intervene only after death, the state risks breaching both their domestic and international human rights obligations and their duty of care. Complicity by omission, slow response, failure to investigate, and selective prosecutions aggravate the breach.

At its core, mob justice also speaks to a loss of faith in the formal justice system. Cases drag on for years, police investigations are often seen as compromised, and court processes exhaust families long before a verdict arrives. When justice appears endlessly delayed or politically manipulated, communities turn to themselves, however brutally. It is not that people prefer violence, but that they no longer trust the law to act at all.

In order for Bangladesh to discharge its human rights obligations in relation to increasing mob violence, it must fulfil two things.

First, it must insist on accountability. Each killing or near killing demands a full, impartial and timely criminal investigation. Those who organized, who encouraged, who armed the mob, who filmed and who cheered must face the same procedures the state claims for its own agents. Prosecutions must be real prosecutions: transparent evidence, independent prosecution, and judicial process. Impunity perpetuates violence. Where communities see no consequences, mob rule becomes a tool of social control.

Second, rights protection must be proactive. Prevention is not a soft policy preference. It is a legal necessity. Effective policing requires training in human rights, rapid response units that prioritise de-escalation, and community policing models that build trust rather than fear. Schools and universities must teach civic duty and the rule of law as actively as they teach mathematics. Local leaders, mosques, template, newspapers and digital platforms must be enlisted to counter rumours and to channel grievances into lawful processes. Social media companies must be pressured to remove incendiary material and to cooperate with investigations. Prevention is structural; it demands resources and political will.

This is a moment for action. The government must act now to enforce the criminal law impartially, to train and resource law enforcement to prevent mob violence, and to provide redress for victims. Civil society must mobilise not only protest but practical interventions: hotlines, rapid response networks, legal aid and community education. Media must refuse to amplify rumours and must prioritise verified reporting. International partners must offer technical support for investigations and for human rights training.To remain silent is to consent. To act is to honour the fragile human dignity that law exists to protect.