How well is Bangladesh respecting people's human rights?
Use the tabs below to explore the scores.
Economic and Social Rights
(2023)
Summary score
76.1%
How well is Bangladesh doing compared to what is possible at its level of income?
Right to
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Summary score
72.7%
How well is Bangladesh doing compared to the best in the world?
Right to
0
% of global best benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Civil and Political Rights
(2025)
Summary score
6.3
How well is Bangladesh's government respecting each right?
Right to freedom from
0
Score
10
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Civil and Political Rights
(2025)
Summary score
7.2
How well is Bangladesh's government respecting each right?
Right to
0
Score
10
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Bangladesh scores 76.1% on Quality of Life when scored against the 'Income adjusted' benchmark.
Compared with the other countries in South Asia, Bangladesh is performing close to average on Quality of Life rights (this comparison is calculated using the 'Income adjusted' benchmark).
Bangladesh scores 72.7% on Quality of Life when scored against the 'Global best' benchmark.
Compared with the other countries in South Asia, Bangladesh is performing close to average on Quality of Life rights (this comparison is calculated using the 'Global best' benchmark).
Bangladesh's Safety from the State score of 6.3 out of 10 suggests that some people are not safe from one or more of the following: arbitrary arrest, torture and ill-treatment, forced disappearance, death penalty or extrajudicial killing.
Compared with the other countries in South Asia, Bangladesh is performing close to average on the right to be safe from the state.
Bangladesh's Empowerment score of 7.2 out of 10 suggests that some people are not enjoying their civil liberties and political freedoms (freedom of speech, assembly and association, democratic rights, and religion and belief).
Compared with the other countries in South Asia, Bangladesh is performing better than average on empowerment rights.
(2023)
How well is Bangladesh doing compared to what is possible at its level of income?
Summary score
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Right to
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
How well is Bangladesh doing compared to the best in the world?
Summary score
0
% of global best benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Right to
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Income adjusted benchmark
Global best benchmark
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Quality of Life rights (or 'economic and social rights') include the rights to food, health, education, housing, and work. HRMI gives two scores, measuring against two different benchmarks.
Bangladesh scores 76.1% on Quality of Life when scored against the 'Income adjusted' benchmark. This score takes into account Bangladesh's resources and how well it is using them to make sure its people's Quality of Life rights are fulfilled.
This score tells us that Bangladesh is only doing 76.1% of what should be possible right now with the resources it has. Since anything less than 100% indicates that a country is not meeting its current duty under international human rights law, our assessment is that Bangladesh has a long way to go to meet its immediate economic and social rights duty.
When measured against the Global best benchmark, comparing Bangladesh to the best performing countries in the world, Bangladesh's score is 72.7%, indicating that it has a very long way to go to meet current Global best standards for ensuring all people have adequate food, education, healthcare, housing and work.
Compared with the other countries in South Asia, Bangladesh is performing close to average on Quality of Life rights (this comparison is calculated using the 'Income adjusted' benchmark).
Compared with the other countries in South Asia, Bangladesh is performing close to average on Quality of Life rights (this comparison is calculated using the 'Global best' benchmark).
See more detail on how Bangladesh performs on the
?Right to
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Right to
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
How does Bangladesh perform by sex for
?By sex
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
To see how Bangladesh's performance by sex has changed over time for a specific indicator, use the Over time graph below and select the indicator from the menu.
How does Bangladesh perform over time for
using the 'Income adjusted' benchmark and 'Low and middle income' assessment standard?Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
(2025)
Which people in Bangladesh were identified by human rights experts to be particularly at risk of having their
violated?Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
When asked to provide more context about who was particularly unlikely to enjoy their right to education in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Students in rural areas, due to limited access to adequate educational facilities and resources
Indigenous children in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT), due to cultural barriers within the education system
Rohingya refugee children, due to closures of learning centres and restrictions on access to the national education system
Children in climate-affected and displaced communities experience disruptions to schooling due to displacement, economic hardship, seasonal flooding, cyclones, and damage to school infrastructure
Children with disabilities, due to barriers to accessing and participating in education
Girls, due to high rates of early and child marriage
(2025)
How well is Bangladesh's government respecting each right?
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to freedom from
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Bangladesh's Safety from the State score of 6.3 out of 10 suggests that some people are not safe from one or more of the following: arbitrary arrest, torture and ill-treatment, forced disappearance, death penalty or extrajudicial killing.
Compared with the other countries in South Asia, Bangladesh is performing close to average on the right to be safe from the state.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
(2025)
Which people in Bangladesh were identified by human rights experts to be particularly at risk of having their Safety from the State violated?
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Right to freedom from arbitrary arrest
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to arbitrary or political arrest and detention by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
People who oppose the government, especially those associated the Awami League, particularly journalists and human rights advocates
People accused of political violence are detained without due process, including lack of access to legal representation
Indigenous peoples in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT), particularly members of the Bawm community, are detained for prolonged periods without trial
Rohingya refugees are detained by border authorities when attempting to move outside designated areas
Members of the LGBTQIA+ community and sex workers, due to a lack of legal protections and high risk of abuse in detention
Right to freedom from forced disappearance
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to disappearance by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
People who oppose the government, especially those associated with the Awami League
There is a lack of accountability regarding past cases of enforced disappearance
Right to freedom from the death penalty
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to death penalty executions by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
People accused of political violence or terrorism
Indigenous peoples and members of ethnic minorities, including members of the Bawm community, particularly in connection with terrorism charges
There are concerns about the application of the death penalty in politically sensitive cases and the adequacy of due process protections
Right to freedom from extrajudicial execution
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to extrajudicial killing by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Human rights advocates and people accused of political violence or terrorism, due to ongoing impunity within security forces
Individuals with particular political affiliations are at risk of extrajudicial killing by security forces for political reasons
Indigenous peoples in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT), particularly Jumma communities, due to deadly violence by security forces and settlers
Rohingya refugees face life-threatening violence at the border and within camps due to a lack of adequate state protection
Right to freedom from torture and ill-treatment
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to torture and ill-treatment by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
People who oppose the government, especially those associated with the Awami League
Detainees, particularly those accused of political violence or terrorism, are subject to abuse while in custody
Indigenous peoples in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT), particularly Jumma and Bawm communities
Members of the LGBTQIA+ community face abuse in detention, due to criminalisation
Sex workers, due to abuse and extortion by government agents, with limited access to protection or reparation
(2025)
How well is Bangladesh's government respecting each right?
Summary score
0
Score
10
Right to
Very bad
Bad
Fair
Good
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Bangladesh's Empowerment score of 7.2 out of 10 suggests that some people are not enjoying their civil liberties and political freedoms (freedom of speech, assembly and association, democratic rights, and religion and belief).
Compared with the other countries in South Asia, Bangladesh is performing better than average on empowerment rights.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
(2025)
Which people in Bangladesh were identified by human rights experts to be particularly at risk of having their Empowerment violated?
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Right to assembly and association
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to restrictions on their rights to assembly and association by the government or its agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
People who oppose the government, especially those associated with the Awami League
Indigenous peoples, particularly Jumma and Bawm communities in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) and Dhaka, due to restrictions and attacks on protests
Protesters, due to restrictions and suppression of demonstrations, including the use of force by security forces, threats of violence, bureaucratic barriers, and the use of anti-terrorism legislation
Civil society and non-governmental organisations, due to bureaucratic restrictions on funding and operations
Members of trade unions and garment workers, due to restrictions on their rights to organise and collectively bargain, including interference by security forces
There are ongoing concerns that the environment for freedom of assembly and association remains uneven across different groups, particularly for political groups in opposition to the ruling government, with legal restrictions by the government and informal restrictions by ruling party supporters limiting participation
Right to opinion and expression
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to restrictions on their rights to opinion and expression by government agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
People who criticise the government or express dissent are at risk of punishment, including harassment and intimidation
People who oppose the government, especially those associated with the Awami League, due to intimidation, threats, and lack of protections, especially people with low social or economic status
Members of marginalised groups, including those with low social or economic status, face barriers to freely expressing their views
There are concerns that the environment for freedom of expression remains uneven across political and social groups, with fear of violence and intimidation limiting open expression
Right to participate in government
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to restrictions on their political participation by the government or its agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
All people, due to delays in holding national elections
Political opposition groups face harassment, arrests, and legal problems
People with particular political affiliations, including those associated with the Awami League or perceived opponents of the ruling party, face restrictions on political participation
Indigenous peoples in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT), due to a lack of political representation
Women, due to a lack of representation in political leadership and decision-making structures
Religious minorities, due to fear and insecurity, including threats of violence
Right to freedom of religion and belief
When asked to provide more context about who was especially vulnerable to restrictions on their freedom of religion and belief by the government or its agents in 2025, our respondents mentioned all of the following:
Religious minorities, especially Hindus and other non-Muslim communities, due to community violence, threats, and property destruction
Minority Muslim groups, including Ahmadi and Sufi communities, due to social hostility, pressure, and occasional threats targeting their religious practices and places of worship
Religious communities are vulnerable to mob violence and attacks by non-state actors
Freedom of religion and belief remains fragile due to social tensions and extremist influence
We asked human rights experts to choose from a list of options for which people were particularly at risk of having this right violated. The images below show their answers.
Highlight
in the word clouds below.People at risk for
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
People at risk for
(2025)
Interpretation: Larger text = more human rights experts identified this group as being at risk.
Source: HRMI 2026 rightstracker.org
Under the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, which China has signed, all countries commit to using the maximum of their available resources to progressively improve rights for their people in these areas.
HRMI has calculated what China could be achieving at its current level of income. The scores are given as a percentage of that realistic potential achievement. China’s best score is for the right to work, where its score of 99.2% means it is doing 99.2% of what it possibly can, given its current level of income.
China also has good scores for the right to health (97.8%), and the right to food (96.5%). For these rights, China is doing nearly as well as it possibly can, given its income. Its right to housing score of 94.6% is at the top of HRMI’s ‘fair’ range.
One of China’s lowest scores is for the right to quality education, where it scores 66.2%, which falls in the ‘very bad’ range. Among 6 East Asian countries and territories with data, this score puts China at the bottom for quality education, just below Mongolia.
Score
0
% of income adjusted benchmark achieved
HRMI score
100%
The right to housing includes scores for the right to sanitation and the right to water.
With a GDP per capita of US$12,951 in 2023, China has the resources to ensure all its people have running water and toilets in their homes.
However, China’s right to sanitation score of 94.9% shows that it could afford to do better. If China efficiently used its available resources, it could achieve a score of 100%, which would mean that 39.2 million more people could have access to basic sanitation.
When it comes to the higher standard of safely managed sanitation, China’s score of 73.6% means that if China effectively and efficiently used its available resources an additional 350 million people could have access to safe sanitation.
If China improved its performance on the right to water from its current score of 94.3% to 100%, 59.8 million more people would have water on their premises.
The good news is that China’s scores for the right to housing have improved steadily over the past decade. China’s score on the right to basic sanitation increased by 20.5 percentage points and that of the right to water by over 9.2 percentage points. The gains have been even greater for safe sanitation. Here China’s score rose from 50.8% to 73.6%, an increase of nearly 23 percentage points. China’s improvements in income adjusted scores show that country’s policies have become more effective at turning resources into good human rights outcomes.
When it comes to the right to food, if China lifted its current score of 96.5% to 100%, around 1.2 million more children under five years old would have enough nutritious food to grow well – that would mean all children in China under five would have enough nutritious food to grow well. This is an achievable goal.
With a current score of 96.5%, China has improved in respecting people’s right to food over the last 20 years, with its score increasing markedly from 84.1% in 2000.
On the right to work, China has made dramatic progress in eliminating absolute poverty. Its score on ensuring people enjoy at least a subsistence income (that is, income above the absolute poverty line of $4.20 per day, measured in 2021 PPP$), has risen from 37.4% in 2002 to 99.2% in 2022, nearly eliminating absolute poverty.
The bigger challenge China currently faces, however, is eliminating relative poverty. That is, ensuring people enjoy at least half the median income and can therefore enjoy a decent life. China’s score on a fair (relative) income stood at only 37.5% in 2018 (the most recent year with data). Projecting the relative poverty rate forward to 2023, this means that while nearly 1,124 million people have enough money to enjoy decent lives, over 213 million are unnecessarily denied this right.
China comes second in the world in using its available resources to ensure people’s right to health is fulfilled, with a score of 97.8%. This is the right where China is most constrained by resources. An increase in income will be necessary to make significant further improvements.
However, at its current income level, China should already be able to do as well as any country in the world in meeting the rights to food, housing, and work.
While China has room for improvement in all the rights we measure, a further consideration is inequity. There are several groups of people whom experts identified as being at higher risk of missing out. These include:
See the people at risk tab on the Rights Tracker for the full lists. The data also show a strong connection between political activity, especially criticism of the government, and lack of enjoyment of economic and social rights.
China has made outstanding progress in ensuring people enjoy their basic economic and social rights. However, all of China’s Quality of Life scores show that the country could still make significant improvements to its people’s lives by using its existing resources more effectively.
If China were using its resources more efficiently to ensure its people’s wellbeing, it could achieve 100% for all the rights we measure. Yet, while its best score nearly reaches that goal – 99.2% on right to a subsistence income – its worst score using the low and middle income country assessment standard – 66.2% on the right to quality education – is far from that level.
If China better upheld its rights obligations and achieved a full 100% score on all the rights we measure, we would see millions more Chinese people living lives of dignity. For example, if China’s scores reached 100% we would see the following number of extra people benefitting:
If China were to operate at its full potential given its current resources, we would expect an additional nearly 1.2 million children under five to grow well and not be stunted.
If China were operating at best practice, each year we would expect an extra 12,600 newborn baby girls and 13,400 newborn baby boys to survive until their fifth birthday.
If China were to operate at its full potential given its current resources, we would expect 92,300 more newborns to be born at a healthy birth weight.
If China were reaching its full potential, given its income constraints, an extra 159,000 15-year-old girls and 419,000 15-year-old boys could eventually reach the age of at least 60.
If China used its resources efficiently, an additional 39.25 million people could have access to basic sanitation at home, 350 million could have access to safe sanitation at home, and an extra 60 million people could have access to water in their homes.
If China were operating at its full potential given its current resources, it could lift 213 million people out of relative poverty.
China scores 3.1 out of 10 for our overall Safety from the State category, telling us that a great many people are at risk of arbitrary or political arrest or detention, torture and ill-treatment, forced disappearance, execution, or extrajudicial killing. This is one of the lowest scores in our sample of 40 countries.
One of China’s lowest scores in this category is 2.1 out of 10 for freedom from torture and ill-treatment.
The human rights experts we surveyed said that people protesting against or criticising the government, people from ethnic and religious minorities, and people in prisons or being questioned by police were at extra risk of being tortured or ill-treated.
Respondents overwhelmingly agreed that human rights advocates, protesters, journalists, and people who criticised the Chinese Communist Party were at particular risk of a wide range of rights violations, especially arbitrary arrest and detention, forced disappearance, and torture and ill-treatment. Respondents particularly noted risks to political dissidents, detainees, and people supporting democracy.
Other vulnerable groups include:
Among other East Asian countries and territories where we measure these rights, China has among the lowest scores for all five Safety from the State rights, generally equal with North Korea.
Summary score
0
Score
10
Summary score
0
Score
10
Summary score
0
Score
10
Summary score
0
Score
10
Summary score
0
Score
10
The Chinese government limits civil liberties and political freedom, with China scoring a very low 2.5 out of 10 in empowerment rights. This is one of the lowest scores in our sample of 39 countries, with only North Korea doing worse.
For the rights to assembly and association, opinion and expression, participation in government, and freedom of religion and belief all of China’s scores fall into the ‘very bad’ range.
When it comes to the right to assembly and association, China scores 2.2 out of 10, and human rights experts identified a wide range of people not enjoying their rights, including human rights advocates, protesters, and people criticising or opposing the government, as well as those from ethnic and religious minorities.
China’s score for the right to opinion and expression is a very low 3.1 out of 10. Respondents highlighted restrictions on political expression. They also noted that online expression is also restricted and reported widespread surveillance and censorship.
China also scores in the ‘very bad’ range for the right to participate in government, with a score of 2.4 out of 10. Respondents noted that pro-democracy supporters, including those in the New Citizens’ Movement, the Southern Street Movement, the China Democracy Party, the White Paper Movement, and independent candidates were not free to participate in government. They also said that people from religious or ethnic minorities could not exercise their democratic rights freely.
For the right to freedom of religion and belief, China scored 2.9. Respondents noted that the government restricts all religious practices, and is particularly repressive towards people following unregistered minority religions such as Christians, Uyghur Muslims, Falun Gong members, and people who attend house churches.
Groups that are particularly vulnerable to empowerment rights violations include:
Among other East Asian countries and territories where we measure these rights, only North Korea scores worse than China.
Summary score
0
Score
10
Summary score
0
Score
10
Summary score
0
Score
10
Summary score
0
Score
10
The Chinese government engaged in transnational repression in a number of ways in 2025.
Transnational repression is activity that violates the human rights of people outside a government’s own territories.
According to77 human rights expert respondents whose work focuses on China and Hong Kong, in 2025 the Chinese government or its agents targeted people for transnational repression in the following places:
Graph shows how many respondents identified each country.
0
Percentage of respondents
100%
0
20
40
60
80
100
Graph shows how many people were targeted in each country, from ‘none’ to ‘a very large number'.
< Less people
Number of people targeted
More people >
None
Very small
Small
Medium
Large
Very large
Experts also gave the following additional information on specific regions where the Chinese government or its agents engaged in transnational repression in 2025:
According to human rights expert respondents, in 2025 the Chinese government or its agents targeted the following kinds of people for transnational repression:
Graph shows how many respondents identified each group of people.
0
Percentage of respondents
100%
Experts gave the following additional information on some of the groups the Chinese government or its agents targeted for transnational repression in 2025:
According to human rights expert respondents, in 2025 the Chinese government or its agents targeted people for transnational repression in the following ways:
Physical harm, harassment, and coercion
Repatriation and overseas law enforcement activity
Surveillance, digital activity, and suppression of free speech
Population
173.6m (2024)
GDP/capita
$2,593 (2024)
current US dollars
$8,487 (2024)
2021 PPP dollars