Full Article Text
1. Introduction
The Right to Education is an essential yet challenging for vulnerable populations, including refugees. This research sheds light on the legal challenges to access education in the Rohingya context of Bangladesh. The introductory chapter provides a brief overview of the importance of the right in the context of Rohingya crisis in Bangladesh. In addition, this chapter includes the central research question, literature review, and the scope and methodology of the research. The article is divided into five chapters. After the introduction (section 1), the status of the Right to Education will be scrutinised under the refugee legal framework (section 2) by exposing the challenges in the Rohingya context (section 3). Then, appropriate solutions will be recommended (section 4) before drawing the conclusion (section 5).
1.1 Importance of Right to Education
Education plays a crucial role in uplifting individuals from impoverished conditions and addressing social inequalities. It is a fundamental human right and indispensable for exercising other human rights.[1] The importance of the Right to Education is widely recognized by the principles set out under the leading international instruments. But it is difficult to determine that the right has been ensured for all.[2] There are still 244 million children worldwide who are not attending school due to multiple factors.[3] Hence, Education holds a paramount position in the Education 2030 Agenda of UNESCO due to its recognition as an inherent human right and fundamental bedrock for fostering peace with the ultimate goal of guaranteeing inclusive and equitable learning opportunities for all individuals, including refugees.[4] In 2018, the global refugee population reached 25.9 million, with over half of them being individuals under the age of 18.[5]
1.2 Background of Refugee Crisis in Bangladesh
A refugee is someone unable or unwilling to return to their origin due to fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, social group, or political opinion.[6] The Rohingya refugees, a Muslim ethnic minority group originally belonging to Myanmar, are the world’s largest stateless population.[7] Myanmar passed a citizenship law in 1982 depriving the Rohingyas of their nationality.[8] Rohingyas have suffered decades of violence and discrimination including limitations on their movement, physical assaults, unjustifiable arrests, custodial torture, sexual violence and gang rape by the military coup in Myanmar. These acts have been categorized as a clear instance of ethnic cleansing by the OHCHR chief.[9] With over 960,000 refugees in Bangladesh, the majority are children, and support to host communities is essential for peaceful coexistence.[10] A study by a Harvard professor on refugee education from World War II to the present reveals refugee children find themselves in a predicament where they are torn between the worldwide commitment to uphold the rights of all individuals.[11]
1.3 Central Research Question
The Rohingya refugee crisis in Bangladesh is intensifying, as the country grapples with the challenge of accommodating 1 million refugees. Consequently, Rohingya children often have limited access to education[12] and the right remaining unfulfilled[13] making the central research question of this article – how does Bangladesh’s national legal framework address challenges to ensure the Right to Education for Rohingya Refugees? To address this primary question, it is necessary to discover the following sub-questions: first, how is the Right to Education guaranteed under the national legal framework of Bangladesh? And, second, to what extent do Bangladeshi laws follow the International Refugee Law standards in terms of the Right to Education?
1.4 Literature Review
The primary literature for this research is the International Conventions related to the Right to Education and the rights of the refugees. In addition, another source of primary literature is the relevant domestic laws of Bangladesh dealing with education right of the refugees and case precedents. For further interpretation, the study relies on secondary sources including scholarly write-ups, reports of UN agencies and others.
UDHR[14] and ICESCR[15] have guaranteed the Right to Education for all without any discrimination. Though these soft laws do not have any binding effect, over the years these documents have gained the status of CIL.[16] 155 countries of the world made education mandatory in their respective jurisdictions.[17] This right has also been particularly upheld for the refugees in the CSR and PSR,[18] but neither Bangladesh is not a party to these conventions[19] nor it has any specific law.[20] Stephen Knight[21] and Beiter[22] argues that the right to education qualifies as a customary norm of international law, referring its application at the regional level and judicial decisions. Furthermore, de la Vaga argues the bindingness of this right on the governments[23] in light of a US Supreme Court Decision.[24]
Article 17 of the Constitution directs the state to take effective measures to ensure the Right to Education.[25] However, it is a mere recommendary provision for the government for not having any judicial enforceability.[26] Bangladesh’s RRRC Commissioner denied the opportunities for higher education for Rohingya people because of their non-citizenship.[27] The policies implemented by the government also reaffirm this statement.[28] On contrary, Jobair Alam that states can protect refugee rights through their constitutions, challenging Hobbes’ theory that states only protect citizens,[29] mentioning The Supreme Court of Bangladesh adopting the CPR principle.[30] This research investigates legal provisions, policies, and implementation, contributing to the discourse on refugee education and human rights, providing insights for policymakers and advocates by responding to rohingya’s urge- “Are We Not Humans?”[31]
1.5 Scope and Methodology of the Research
This research aims to assess the Right to Education in Bangladesh’s legal framework and its alignment with International Refugee Law in the context of the Rohingya refugee crisis. It will analyze specific legislation and policies to address the Rohingya education issue in Bangladesh, identifying gaps and challenges. Discussions of other country’s laws, supplementary rights, or diplomatic dialogue are beyond the scope but will provide a limited perspective. Furthermore, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of this paper, as a single study cannot comprehensively cover every legal dimension of the crisis. Specifically, this research explicitly excludes and does not fall under the frameworks of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) or the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Instead, the theoretical framework is firmly and exclusively defined by Customary International Law (CIL). The core focus and legal nexus of this study are demonstrated strictly from the perspective of CIL.
The research follows a doctrinal, analytical and qualitative methodology. This desk-based research will examining primary and secondary sources such as international treaties, national laws of Bangladesh, case studies, and discussions with renowned global scholars in prestigious journals, including books, edited books, articles, and newspapers. The research hypothesizes that although Bangladesh’s national legal framework acknowledges the Rohingya refugees’ right to education to some extent, it is not consistent with the International Refugee Law. Specifically, despite having an obligation under the CIL and scope under Constitution, the absence of concentrated legislation, policy restrictions, and not adopting the Refugee Conventions are the causes of the inconsistencies. While this paper relies strictly on a CIL framework, it is acknowledged that other scholars employ alternative theoretical models to examine this issue. For instance, recent scholarship utilizes an intersectional analysis—specifically, an intersectional gender analysis—to highlight the unique, overlapping vulnerabilities present in Rohingya girls’ education.
2. Status of Right to Education under Refugee Law Framework
Though universally guaranteed, the status of Right to Education varies in different jurisdiction. Specifically, it has been challenging to argue that a refugee is equally entitled to the Right to Education like any other person. To identify exactly where the refugee’s right to education belongs, this chapter will discuss the International Refugee Law framework with regard to the Right to Education and then it will explore the National Legal Framework of Bangladesh. Finally, a sub-chapter will be dedicated to scrutinizing the nexus of Domestic Law and International Law.
2.1 International Law
The Right to Education is a fundamental human right guaranteed for all by the standards set out in UDHR AND ICESCR. Article 26 of the UDHR states that “Everyone has the right to education in the elementary and fundamental stages, and it shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.”[32] UDHR is one of the pioneer documents in the field of human rights advocacy. In 2023, 75 years of UDHR has been globally celebrated. But the question remains whether this instrument has actually succeeded. Attention to the wording of the above-mentioned article indicates that the UDHR has not made any dividends in terms of guaranteeing the right. Education shall be compulsory but in reality, that is not the case.
Another leading instrument ICESCR, in Article 13 (1), ensures widespread practice of Right to Education despite being a soft law.[33] Education aims to develop human personality, appreciate dignity, respect human rights, and fundamental freedoms, empowering individuals to engage in a democratic society. It fosters mutual understanding among diverse nations and contributes to the United Nations’ efforts in global peace and stability.[34]
Two instruments discussed above specifically mention that the Right to Education shall be accessible to all regardless of any class dividend and discrimination, and apparently, it extends to the refugees too. However, there is specific instruments upholding the education rights of the refugees. Protection for the refugees is globally ensured through two international instruments: the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol.[35] Article 22 (1) of the CSR reads, the states shall equally provide education the refugees and its nationals.[36] Though this provision specifically guarantees the education rights of the refugees, unfortunately, Bangladesh is not a party to this convention.
2.2 National Law
Before discussing the status of refugee education in Bangladesh, it is important to understand the status of the right to education in the country in general. Article 17 of the Constitution guarantees fundamental education to all individuals[37] with a non-discriminatory education policy ensuring a uniform curriculum across the country.[38] However, the stateless refugees are not encompassed within the scope of the national education policy.[39] Numerous scholars have engaged in the discourse surrounding the notion that the aforementioned attitude exhibits inherent self-contradiction.[40] This contradiction arises when a State, in accordance with the principle of non-refoulement, permits stateless refugees to remain within its territorial boundaries yet concurrently imposes restrictions on their access to state services.[41] The regulation of refugee matters in the country has been governed by the FA, exposing the absence of a dedicated legal framework addressing the Rohingya Crisis.[42] While refugees have obligations to comply with existing laws and regulations towards their host country,[43] they are also entitled to different rights during the asylum application process or after gaining refugee status.[44] However, in all cases, general human rights law applies to all refugees, including the right to education.[45]
2.3 Nexus of Domestic Law and International Law
As a sign of its constitutional commitment to human rights, Bangladesh ratified the ICESCR in 1998.[46] But the country is still far behind in exercising its rights and carrying out its obligations under the ICESCR, as the review study of NHRC shows.[47]
Bangladesh operates under a dualist system,[48] meaning treaties do not have self-executing status within the country’s domestic legal sphere.[49] Bangladesh’s government is not legally obligated to fulfill responsibilities outlined in international treaties until they are formally integrated into the country’s domestic legal framework.[50] The government’s responsibility remains until the provisions are incorporated into the domestic legal framework.[51] Hence, despite being a party to UNHCR EC, Bangladesh may not feel obligated to comply with CPR and PSR, but here CIL and the Constitution may come into play.[52] The Constitution places significant importance on fostering international peace and collaboration, with Article 25 explicitly endorsing the principles outlined in the UN Charter.[53] Moreover, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh has applied the principle of international law.[54] Also, those principle have gained the status of CIL.[55]
3. Challenges in Rohingya Context
This chapter will be critically identify the specific legal challenges to ensure Right to Education in Rohingya context.
3.1 Legal Status of the Rohingyas
Bangladesh, a country with a large number of Rohingya refugees,[56] has been grappling with the consequences of Myanmar’s 1982 Citizenship Law.[57] The Rohingya population, who have been displaced by state-patronized suppression, has been officially recognised as refugees in Bangladesh between 1991 and 1992.[58] However, the government imposed restrictions on Rohingya refugee registration in 1994, counting only 36,000 officially recognised refugees in Bangladesh.[59] Consequently, 906,686 Rohingyas are registered as FDMN, meaning having no refugee status.[60] The legal implications of FDMN are not publicly available, but it does not imply “refugee status.”[61] This raises questions about the interpretation of FDMN, as it could be seen as an illegal migrant, breaking state laws related to immigration and passport control.[62] As a result, Rohingyas may be treated as criminals and imprisoned, with their rights to access services being largely dependent on their home country’s laws.[63]
3.2 Lack of a Specialized Law
As evident from the discussion, one of the vital factors driving the challenges is a lack of a specialized law to govern the refugee issues. Since 2017, almost every day Bangladesh has been receiving Rohingya refugees. However, it shows the lack of visionary mindset of the authorities as they could not adopt a law to govern these matters. In fact, they could not foresee the scenario and the impact of it which has resulted in suffering them significantly.
The Bangladesh Citizenship (Temporary Provisions) Order 1972 addresses the inadequacies of the Citizenship Act 1951, allowing the government to grant citizenship to any person from Europe, North America, or other states.[64] However, the Bangladesh Constitution does not provide any scope for local integration for the Rohingya refugees. The judiciary plays a pivotal role in expanding indirect constitutional protection to the Rohingya, as they can exert influence in interpreting constitutional provisions, such as the right to life.[65] Article 32 guarantees citizens and non-citizens the right to a decent and healthy life, which is a life worth living.[66] Thus, the right to life clause guarantees other rights like health and livelihood, regardless of whether these rights are granted to non-citizens or not.[67] There have been instances in the past where individuals who are not citizens have submitted a writ petition under Article 102, such as the Rohingyas, can assert their fundamental rights by adhering to the appropriate legal process. Some notable cases are Md. Abid Khan and others v The Government of Bangladesh and others,[68] and Bangladesh v Prof. Golam Azam.[69]
3.3 Non-compliance with International Law
Drawing on the discussion from Chapter 2, another major issue behind the challenge is Bangladesh’s non-compliance with the International Law i.e., the Refugee Convention. Bangladesh’s Constitution, being the supreme law of the land, overrides both national and international law, with national law prevailing in conflict situations.[70] However, it was held in Hussain Muhammad Ershad v Bangladesh that “it is [true] that Universal Human Rights norms, whether given in the Universal Declaration or in the Covenants, are not directly enforceable in national Courts. But if their provisions are incorporated into the domestic law, they are enforceable in national Courts.”[71] In Bangladesh, customary international law is binding as long as it doesn’t contradict domestic law, and courts tend to adhere to municipal law when enforcing either law.[72] Hence, despite having the scope, not complying with international law is creating further challenges to tackling the refugee issue since Bangladesh is not a party to CPR and PSR.
3.4 Policy Barrier
States frequently pass laws and policies that restrict services to refugees while upholding the bare minimum of goals when managing refugees under the pretence of realistic humanitarianism.[73] In Bangladesh, these political strategies are also employed. For example, the National Education Policy of Bangladesh excludes the rohingyas from receiving education above sixth standards. Bangladesh has signed a memorandum of understanding with Myanmar for repatriation of Rohingya refugees, but political challenges and the military’s active role in persecution in Myanmar have hindered the formal repatriation process.[74] In these circumstances, barring the higher education of the refugees with newly implied policy creates a traumatizing situation for them. The FPSP of Constitution with regard to Right to Education does not explicitly mention ‘citizens’, suggesting that Bangladesh’s responsibility extends to noncitizen children, including Rohingya children. The FPSP should be read alongside the corresponding legislation, such as the Primary Education (Compulsory) Act 1992. The AD has enforced FPSP through harmonious interpretation with fundamental rights in several cases, notably in Ain O Salish Kendra (ASK) v Government of Bangladesh and others[75] and Faizul Islam (Md.) and Others Vs. Bangladesh and Others.[76] As a result, the Bangladesh Constitution provides scope for implementing human rights for Rohingya children, but geopolitical factors can deprive them of their rights. The government has endorsed the GIEP for Children of FDMN in Bangladesh, providing informal learning structures.[77] Though the govt has given a statement of taking multiple initiatives[78] and since January 2020, Rohingya children in Bangladesh have received formal education in the Burmese language and follow Myanmar’s national curriculum, there are still the above-mentioned policy barriers exist due to certain limitations imposed that obstruct the applicability of the initiatives taken.
4. Recommendation
4.1 Legal Reform
The most efficient recommendation would be adopting a specialized refugee law by the Bangladesh government. Regardless of the fact that the state authorities are facing difficulty in tackling with the issue and are unwilling to keep them for longer, they have to accept the fact that they have miserably failed to create international pressure on Myanmar for the safe return of the Rohingyas. Hence, in these circumstances, a specialized law is required to govern the refugee issues that will not only solve education issues but also cover up all other necessary aspects.
Moreover, Bangladesh shall comply with the international standards by adopting the Refugee Convention. The country itself, once being a refugee nation, shall be more empathetic towards the current refugees by following these steps.
Bangladesh does not have a domestic legal system in place to address the issue of RSD. Therefore, international law can be employed to establish the criteria for RSD and provide protection for refugees.[79] The Supreme Court of Bangladesh frequently employs international law to interpret legal provisions, as demonstrated in the RMMRU v. Bangladesh case, where the High Court Division relied on the principle of non-refoulement.[80] In 1993, the Bangladesh government and UNHCR entered into a Memorandum of Understanding, which aimed to guarantee the protection and well-being of the Rohingya population both within and outside the camps.[81] At present, there are 33,956 Rohingyas who have completed the registration process and are residing in camps, while the rest are classified as registered refugees. The Rohingyas have the option to assert their rights through suitable legal processes. However, the crucial provision for safeguarding refugees, as outlined in part II, is article 25. This article permits the utilization of international human rights law and customary international law to protect vulnerable groups.
4.2 Adopting Best State Practice
The refugee issue is visible in most of the countries of the world and many states have successfully dealt with the issue. However, not every example can be fitted in the context of Bangladesh considering its struggling economy and over-crowding population. However, there are indeed some state practices that can be implemented by Bangladesh. One of the such practices is to introduce an alternative education system. Considering that one of the major barriers is that there are not expert teachers who can teach the refugees in Burmese language. Instead, the authority can train educated people within the refugee camps who can be useful to teach other. Whatever education are provided to them, there is no scope of certification.[82] Moreover, in this era of digital technology, it would not be very difficult to provide them with digital learning methods. Though there are obstacles but proper policy adoption can efficiently overcome the problems. Furthemore, there are universities that specifically provides scholarships for students with refugee status. Bangladesh govt can built its network with those universities and send rohingya refugee students in different programs. In this regard, Bangladesh shall be cooperated by the United States and other countries to provide scholarship programs and enable Rohingya students to access higher education abroad or through online courses, despite challenges in accrediting the Myanmar Curriculum Program.[83] Refugees possess inherent and essential entitlements as human beings, such as the right to life, freedom, respect, and the opportunity to work, even if these rights are not expressly outlined in the constitutions of countries like India[84] and Malaysia.[85] On contrary, Part III of Bangladesh’s Constitution lists 18 fundamental rights, applicable to both citizens and non-citizens, with all rights for citizens and seven for non-citizens, excluding education rights.[86]
4.3 Regional and International Collaboration:
International collaboration is essential when developing nations, such as Bangladesh, are compelled to accommodate a significant influx of refugees without sufficient resources.[87] Only four countries in South and Southeast Asia, namely Afghanistan, Cambodia, Philippines, and Timor-Leste, have signed the Refugee Convention, which a total of 145 countries globally have signed.[88] The absence of dedication to the rights of refugees and asylum seekers frequently leads to the disregard of their needs and well-being. Countries such as Malaysia, Nepal, Indonesia, Thailand, and India do not have comprehensive national legal systems in place to deal with forced migration, resulting in a failure to differentiate between refugees and other migrants.[89]
The lack of international or domestic legal frameworks in the region indicates that regional organizations play a crucial role in establishing and enforcing norms for protecting refugees.[90] SAARC, the primary multilateral organizations in the area, have a restricted impact when it comes to dealing with forced migration concerns.[91] Their focus on the state as the central actor implies that the organizations have little capacity to create a framework for regional protection.[92] The Rohingya crisis, involving multiple countries, has been predominantly portrayed as a bilateral matter rather than a transnational or multilateral one. SAARC lacks a legally binding or policy-based structure to deal with matters related to forced migration.[93] Therefore, Bangladesh needs to strengthen regional and international collaboration in addition to working on its legal framework, which may extend to work more intensively with humanitarian organizations. The possibility of resettlement appears improbable due to the absence of enthusiasm from neighboring nations, and the establishment of a sustainable regional initiative necessitates the implementation of a comprehensive national and regional framework.[94]
5. Conclusion
Despite several challenges, there have been initiatives taken by Bangladesh. However, multifaceted challenges, particularly the effect of politics over law has been a matter of genuine concern for the Rohingya issue in Bangladesh. The findings of the research shows that the national legal framework of Bangladesh is yet to reach the global standard for refugee protection. However, from the aspect of the scope of CIL and Constitution, it is very much possible to ensure a good lifestyle for the Rohingya including upholding their right to education. Apart from socio-political and economic issues, Bangladesh shall strengthen the legal function by covering the loopholes identified and collaborating with other stake holders. The UNHCR EC emphasizes that respect for human rights and humanitarian principles is the responsibility of all members of the international community.[95] South Asian countries including Bangladesh should address refugee issues unitedly,[96] focusing on regional reforms instead of domestic initiatives while considering the international legal paradigm for global community concern.[97] Only this combination of individual and collective effort can ensure a world without any homeless person.
Footnotes
[1] ‘What You Need to Know about the Right to Education’ (UNESCO, April 20, 2023) https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/what-you-need-know-about-right-education accessed 17 May 2026.
[2] Sarah Elizabeth Dryden-Peterson, ‘Refugee Education: The Crossroads of Globalization’ (Harvard Library, 2016) <https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/30194044> accessed 5 June 2026.
[3] ‘The Right to Education’ (UNESCO, December 12, 2023) <https://www.unesco.org/en/right-education>.
[4] Rolla Moumne and Sakai Leticia, ‘Protecting the Right to Education for Refugees’ (2017) United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000251076> accessed 14 February 2026.
[5] Sarah Dryden-Peterson and Hania Mariën, ‘The Right to Education’ in Cathryn Costello, Michelle Foster and Jane McAdam (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Refugee Law (OUP 2021) ch 54, sec 1.
[6] Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951, art 1 (A) (2).
[7] ‘Rohingya Refugee Crisis Explained’ (USA for UNHCR, 23 August 2023) <https://www.unrefugees.org/news/rohingya-refugee-crisis-explained/ > accessed 17 May 2026.
[8] ‘The Rohingya Crisis: Explained’ (Save the Children) <https://www.savethechildren.org/us/what-we-do/emergency-response/rohingya-crisis> accessed 22 January 2026.
[9] Noor Nanji, ‘UN Secretary-General urges end to Rohingya violence’ The National News (Abu Dhabi, 14 September 2017) accessed 9 April 2026.
[10] ‘Rohingya Refugee Crisis’ (UNICEF) <https://www.unicef.org/bangladesh/en/rohingya-refugee-crisis> accessed 18 May 2026.
[11] Sarah Elizabeth Dryden-Peterson, ‘Refugee Education: The Crossroads of Globalization’ (Harvard Library, 2016) <https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/30194044> accessed 5 June 2026.
[12] M Mahruf C Shohel, ‘Education in Emergencies: Challenges of Providing Education for Rohingya Children Living in Refugee Camps in Bangladesh’ (2020) 13(1) Education Inquiry 104, 107.
[13] Jobair Alam, ‘The Status and Rights of the Rohingya as Refugees under International Refugee Law: Challenges for a Durable Solution’ (2020) 19 Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies 1, 2, 6–7.
[14] Universal Declaration of Human Rights, art 26.
[15] The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art 13.
[16] Constance de la Vega, ‘The Right to Equal Education: Merely a Guiding Principle or Customary International Legal Right?’ (1994) 11 (1) Harvard Blackletter Law Journal, 24.
[17] ‘What You Need to Know about the Right to Education’ (n 1).
[18] The Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, art 22(1).
[19] Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit (RMMRU) vs. Government of Bangladesh (2020) 72 DLR 402.
[20] Ashraful Azad, ‘Foreigners Act and the Freedom of Movement of the Rohingyas in Bangladesh’ (2017) 5 Griffith Journal of Law and Human Dignity 183, 188.
[21] Stephen Knight, ‘Proposition 187 and International Human Rights Law: Illegal Discrimination in the Right to Education’ (1995) 19 Hastings Int’l & Comp L Rev 183, 188–95.
[22] Klause D Beiter, The Protection of the Right to Education by International Law (Brill 2006) 44.
[23] Constance de la Vega, ‘The Right to Equal Education: Merely a Guiding Principle or Customary International Legal Right?’ (1994) 11(1) Harvard Blackletter Law Journal, 24.
[24] San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973) 411 US 1.
[25] Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh 1972, art 17.
[26] Shakhawat Liton, ‘How the Controversial 15th Amendment Curtailed People’s Power’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 12 September 2012) <https://www.thedailystar.net/news/how-the-controversial-15th-amendment-curtailed-peoples-power> accessed 11 February, 2026.
[27] Kamruzzaman., ‘Lack of Higher Education Fuels Frustrations Among Rohingya in Bangladesh.’ (Anadolu Agency, 24 Mar. 2023, <www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/lack-of-higher-education-fuels-frustrations-among-rohingya-in-bangladesh/2854805> accessed 27 March 2026.
[28] Guidelines on Informal Education Programming (GIEP) for Children of Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals (FDMN) in Bangladesh.
[29] Frances Nicholson and Judith Kumin, A Guide to International Refugee Protection and Building State Asylum Systems: Handbook for Parliamentarians No 27 (Inter-Parliamentary Union and UNHCR, 2017) 34, 261.
[30] Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit (RMMRU) vs. Government of Bangladesh (n 19).
[31] ‘Are We Not Human? Denial of Education for Rohingya Refugee Children in Bangladesh’ (Human Rights Watch, 3 December 2019) <https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/12/03/are-we-not-human/denial-education-rohingya-refugee-children-bangladesh> accessed 5 June 2026.
[32] Universal Declaration of Human Rights (n 14) art 26.
[33] International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art 13 (1).
[34] ibid.
[35] Nour Mohammad, ‘Refugee Protection Under the Constitution of Bangladesh: A Brief Overview’ (2012) 39 Refugee Watch 141, 143.
[36] The Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951, art 22 (1).
[37] The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, art 17.
[38] Umme Habiba Fahmina Karim, ‘No Education – Lost Generation: The Right to Education of Stateless Rohingyas in Bangladesh’ (INCLUSIVE CITIZENSHIP & HUMAN RIGHT, 15 June 2023) <https://doi.org/10.25133/jpssv312023.042> accessed 2 May, 2026.
[39] ibid.
[40] Umme Habiba Fahmina Karim, ‘Refugee Education in Bangladesh: A Nation-State Paradox’ (2023) 31 Journal of Population and Social Studies 762, 772.
[41] ibid.
[42] Azad (n 20).
[43] Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 (entered into force April 22, 1954) 189 UNTS 150, art 2.
[44] Hilary Evans Cameron, ‘Refugee Status Determinations and the Limits of Memory’ (2010) 22 (4) International Journal of Refugee Law 469, 511.
[45] Alam (n 35).
[46] M Zakir Hossain, ‘The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: A Study on Bangladesh Compliance’ (National Human Rights Commission, Bangladesh, 2012) 6.
[47] ibid.
[48] Sumaiya Khair, ‘Bringing International Human Rights Law Home: Trends and Practices of Bangladesh Courts’ (2011) 17 Asian Yearbook of International Law 47, 49.
[49] Muhammad Ekramul Haque, Current International Legal Issues: Bangladesh (Brill 2019) 15.
[50] Sheikh Hafizur Rahman Karzon and Abdullah-Al Faruque, ‘Status of International Law Under the Constitution of Bangladesh: An Appraisal’ (1999) 3 (1) Bangladesh Journal of Law 23, 42, 47.
[51] Haque (n 49).
[52] Alam (n 35).
[53] The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh 1972, art 25.
[54] HM Ershad v Bangladesh and others 21 BLD (AD) (2001) 69.
[55] Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit (RMMRU) vs. Government of Bangladesh (n 19)
[56] Karim (n 40).
[57] Jessica Olney, Nurul Haque and Roshid Mubarak, ‘We must prevent a lost generation: Community-led education in Rohingya camps (PRIO Paper)’ (2019) Peace Research Institute Oslo <https://www.prio.org/publications/11387> accessed 8 June 2026.
[58] Jasques P Leider, ‘Conflict and mass violence in Arakan (Rakine State): The 1942 Events and Political Identity Formation’ (2017) ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute 1, 11.
[59] Kazi Fahmida Farzana, Memories of Burmese Rohingya Refugees: Contested identity and belonging (Springer, 2017) 68, 72.
[60] ‘Rohingya Refugee Crisis’ (n 10).
[61] Karim (n 40).
[62] ibid.
[63] ibid.
[64] Bangladesh Citizenship (Temporary Provisions) Order 1972, art 2B (2).
[65]Alam (n 35).
[66] Adv Zulhas Uddin Ahmed v Bangladesh (2010) 15 MLR (HCD) [18]; Dr Mohiuddin Farooque (BELA) v Bangladesh 55 DLR (HCD) 69 [23].
[67] Alam (n 35).
[68] Md. Abid Khan and others v The Government of Bangladesh and others (2003) 55 DLR 318.
[69] Bangladesh v Prof. Golam Azam (1994) 46 DLR (AD) 192.
[70] Bianca Karim and Tirza Theunissen, ‘Bangladesh’ in Dinah Shelton (ed) International Law and Domestic Legal Systems: Incorporation, Transformation, and Persuasion (OUP 2012) 109.
[71] Hussain Muhammad Ershad v Bangladesh 21 BLD (AD) (2001) 69
[72] M Sanjeeb Hossain, ‘Bangladesh’s Judicial Encounter with the 1951 Refugee Convention’ (2021) 67 Forced Migration Review 59, 60.
[73] Bina D Costa, ‘The Rohingya and the denial of the ‘right to have rights.’ (ReliefWeb, 4 July 2012) <https://reliefweb.int/report/myanmar/rohingya-and-denial-%E2%80%98right-haverights%E2%80%99> accessed 18 May 2026.
[74] Alice Cuddy, ‘Myanmar coup: What is happening and why’ BBC News (London, 1 April 2021) accessed 18 May 2026.
[75] Ain O Salish Kendra (ASK) v Government of Bangladesh and others (1999) 4 MLR (HC) 358.
[76] Faizul Islam (Md.) and Others Vs. Bangladesh and Others (2016) LEX/BDHC/0100/2016.
[77] Ministry of Primary and Mass Education, Guideline for Informal Education for FDMN in Bangladesh (MoPME 2019) 3.
[78] ‘UNHCR, Rohingya Refugee Response in Bangladesh: Education Factsheet – as of 31 December 2022 (UNHCR 2022) 1.
[79] Borhan Uddin Khan and Muhammad Mahabubur Rahman, ‘Country Fiche – Bangladesh: Global Asylum Governance and the European Union’s Role’ (Country Fiche Bangladesh, October 2020) <https://www.asileproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Country-Fiche_Bangladesh_Final_Pub.pdf> 23 accessed 10 May 2026.
[80] RMMRU v. Bangladesh (2016) Writ Petition No 10504.
[81] Human Rights Watch, Burma/Bangladesh: Burmese Refugees in Bangladesh – The Search for Durable Solutions (Human Rights Watch 2000) <https://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/burma/burm005-05.htm> accessed 30 May 2026.
[82] Md. Mahbubur Rahman and others, ‘Structural barriers to providing basic education to Rohingya children in the Kutupalong refugee camp, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh’ (2022) 3 Bangladesh International Journal of Educational Research Open, 5, 7.
[83] Daniel P Sullivan, ‘Hope amid Despair: Finding Solutions for Rohingya in Bangladesh, REPORT’ ( Refugees International, 13 December 2022) <https://www.refugeesinternational.org/reports-briefs/hope-amid-despair-finding-solutions-for-rohingya-in-bangladesh/> accessed 19 June 2026.
[84] Louis De Raedt v Union of India (1981) AIR SC 1886 (12).
[85] Ali Salih Khalaf v Taj Mahal Hotel (2014) 4 Indian Law Journal 20 (9).
[86] Alam (n 35).
[87] Nicholson and Kumin (n 29) 261.
[88] ‘Asia Refugee Policy Analysis’ (Reliefweb, 14 September 2018) <https://reliefweb.int/report/bangladesh/asia-refugee-policy-analysis> accessed 28 March 2026.
[89] Omar Grech, ‘Migrants’ and refugees’ rights: a brief international law perspective’ in Omar Grech and Wohlfeld (eds.), Migration in the Mediterranean: human rights, security and development perspectives (Mediterranean Academy of Diplomatic Studies 2014) 40, 47.
[90] Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia 1976, art 2.
[91] Charter of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation 1985, art II.
[92] ibid, art X.
[93] ‘Asia Refugee Policy Analysis’ (Reliefweb, 14 September 2018) <https://reliefweb.int/report/bangladesh/asia-refugee-policy-analysis> accessed 28 March 2026.
[94] Jobair Alam, ‘The Current Rohingya Crisis in Myanmar in Historical Perspective’ (2019) 39(1) Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 1, 18.
[95] Executive Committee of the High Commissioner’s Programme, ‘Conclusion on International Cooperation and Burden and Responsibility Sharing in Mass Influx Situations No 100 (LV) – 2004’ (2004) 1.
[96] Maya Than and Tin Mung Mung Than, ‘ASEAN Enlargement and Myanmar’ in Mya Than and Carolyn Gates (eds), ASEAN Enlargement: Impacts and Implications (Institute of Southeast Asian Studies 2001) 249.
[97] Jobair Alam, ‘The Rohingya Minority of Myanmar: Surveying Their Status and Protection in International Law’ (2018) 25 International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 1, 21.