The Dhaka University (DU) administration's decision to expel 128 students for their alleged involvement in the July attacks has sparked widespread criticism, with students demanding explanations for the exclusion of key perpetrators. Social media platforms have been inundated with reactions, with many questioning the integrity of the investigation and the fairness of the expulsion list.
The publication of this expulsion list has ignited significant controversy, particularly as high-profile individuals, such as Tanvir Hasan Saikat, the General Secretary of the Dhaka University Chhatra League (currently under arrest), and Abu Yunus, the General Secretary of Bijoy Ekattor Hall Unit Chhatra League, are notably absent.
Strikingly, no students from the Faculty of Science or female students have been named, despite evidence of their involvement.
Bijoy Ekattor Hall recorded the highest number of expulsions, including some reportedly innocent students, while Jagannath Hall-despite its major role in the July violence-saw only two expulsions. Moreover, at least 10-15 individuals with documented criminal activities captured on CCTV footage were excluded, raising serious concerns about the transparency of the investigation.
Students have openly expressed their anger at the omission of key perpetrators. Shariful Islam KD and AB Zubair have publicly demanded explanations, questioning the influence behind these omissions. In response, student organisations have rejected the list and announced protest marches.
A Joint Member Secretary of the Bangladesh Democratic Students Council (BDSC), DU Unit, stated: "Only 128 students have been expelled. The number of vice presidents alone exceeds this." This statement reflects student frustration that the scale of punishment does not match the magnitude of the violence.
Some believe the actual number of perpetrators far exceeds the list. Md Imdadul Haque Milon, a student from the 2021-22 academic session, suggested: "It should have been at least 500+. Everything happened right before our eyes. Everyone is identified! Yet..." Similarly, Sultanul Arefin from the Islamic History and Culture department (2020-21) estimated that at least 1,000 students should have been expelled.
There have also been accusations of gender and departmental bias in the investigation. Former student Wahid Wahi noted that no female students were listed, while Zarin Saojia (International Relations, 2022-23) added: "This list excludes the Bedis, who were even more dangerous." Md Juwel Rana questioned why no science students appeared on the list, suggesting political motives behind the selection process.
Several students recounted their experiences during the attacks. Emran Uddin (Arabic department, Bijoy Ekattor Hall resident) alleged that Abu Yunus physically assaulted him and others on 17 July, yet Yunus's name remains absent from the list.
Concerns have also been raised about disproportionate punishments. Zarif Arfan (Bijoy Ekattor Hall) criticised the exclusion of many attackers captured on CCTV footage while others faced severe penalties for minor offences. Md Oyhedul echoed this, questioning why Bijoy Ekattor Hall was disproportionately targeted when violence occurred across multiple halls.
The inconsistencies in the investigation have led students to question the credibility of the committee itself. A student from the Pali and Buddhist Studies department (2020-21) remarked: "The investigation committee itself should be investigated. Have they engaged in corruption while compiling this list?"
Beyond the student body, concerns have also been directed at faculty members allegedly complicit in the violence. Reyad Mahmud (MBA, Management Information Systems) asked why no teachers have faced repercussions, arguing that administrative accountability is essential to curbing political violence.
Legal concerns have also been raised. Arafatul Osmani (Master's student, Law department) highlighted cases of innocent students being expelled unfairly, emphasising the absence of an appeal process. He remarked: "If someone mistakenly added my name, what could I do?"
In response to the controversy, students of Bijoy Ekattor Hall have announced plans to lay siege to the Vice-Chancellor's office, using handheld megaphones to demand a complete and transparent list of perpetrators.
Protesters claimed that several individuals who actively participated in the attacks were omitted from the expulsion list.
"Despite undeniable evidence, certain names have been deliberately removed. We want to know who influenced this decision," one protester declared. The exclusion of Tanvir Hasan Saikat, the General Secretary of the Dhaka University (DU) Chhatra League, drew particular ire. "His group was the most aggressive during the attacks, yet his name is nowhere to be found," another student added.
As tensions escalated, DU Proctor Associate Professor Saifuddin Ahmed and Fact-Finding Committee Convener Quazi Mahfujul Hoque Supan engaged with the demonstrators. They assured students that their concerns would be addressed. "Students assumed this was the final list, but when we submitted our report, we clearly stated that we had only covered 20% of the cases," Supan explained. "This is an ongoing process, and a new committee has been formed to ensure a more thorough investigation."
Concerns about the exclusion of high-profile attackers have persisted. Tonmoy Chowdhury (Peace and Conflict Studies) highlighted the absence of Mashfiq Ahmed (Bangla department), who was visibly wielding an iron rod in video footage.
Similarly, Sumaiya Islam brought attention to the July 15 attack on Dhaka Medical, pointing out that most attackers were from Jagannath Hall, yet only two students from that hall faced expulsion.
Frustration has been voiced by the Bangladesh Democratic Students Council (BDSC), with Joint Member Secretary Smriti Afroz Sumi questioning the integrity of the investigation process. "Was the responsibility for making the expulsion list given to a Chhatra League member? The list makes it seem so," she wrote, highlighting the exclusion of 10-15 names from each hall despite clear evidence.
As outrage grows, students are increasingly demanding a revised expulsion list that includes all identified perpetrators, regardless of their political affiliations. Many argue that if the current investigation committee fails to act, a neutral body must be established to ensure fairness.
While some believe the expulsion of 128 students is justified, others insist that the true masterminds have been shielded. As protests escalate, the university administration faces mounting pressure to justify its decisions and rebuild trust in the investigation process.
