In a recent incident, a young individual, going by the name Haya, encountered challenges while applying for an e-passport in Bangladesh. The bureaucratic process required her to provide her biological parents’ names during biometric enrollment, despite initially listing her legal guardian. This situation is not unique and reflects a broader issue in Bangladesh where acquiring essential documents like birth certificates, National Identity Cards (NID), and passports is often a complicated and frustrating process.
The Citizenship Act of 1951 establishes that individuals born in Bangladesh are citizens of the country, entitling them to obtain crucial identity documents such as passports, birth certificates, and NIDs. While the law does not mandate both parents’ names in all cases, administrative practices, forms, and digital systems frequently demand this information. This discrepancy leads to delays, frustrations, and exclusion for many citizens.
Each document has its own set of challenges. For e-passports, adults can opt to use a guardian’s name instead of parental details during the application process. However, in practice, applications may be stalled if biological parents’ names are missing, necessitating a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for those using guardians’ names. NIDs do not offer an option to include a guardian’s name, resulting in some individuals having “jana nei” (not known) recorded instead of parental names. Similarly, birth certificates lack provisions for legal guardians’ names, leading to inconsistent and improvised entries in the absence of parental details.
The repercussions of these administrative hurdles are disproportionately borne by marginalized groups such as children raised by single mothers, orphans, and individuals without known parents. The inability to acquire essential documents like birth certificates, NIDs, and passports can hinder access to education, employment, financial services, and travel opportunities.
In response to these challenges, rights organizations filed a writ petition in March 2024, challenging the mandatory disclosure of parental names and advocating for reforms to allow the inclusion of a guardian’s name as an alternative. Despite a court ruling directing the government to address these issues, progress has been slow, leaving applicants like Haya in bureaucratic uncertainty.
Efforts to streamline administrative processes through a unified civil registration commission are underway, but meaningful reform requires shifting towards a citizenship-based identity system and harmonizing data across agencies to ensure consistency and accessibility. Until these systemic changes are implemented, individuals like Haya will continue to face barriers that impede their rights and opportunities in Bangladesh.
