IN BANGLADESH, the collapse of Rana Plaza in 2013 is remembered as a black day, and the tragedy continues to haunt those who survived it. Before engaging with the study of human rights, I too viewed the collapse largely as an accident, a catastrophic failure of a building that should never have housed factories. Over time, however, my understanding changed. Studying business and human rights made it impossible to see Rana Plaza as a mere accident. It was, instead, a brutal manifestation of a global supply chain model in which profit was prioritised over human life, and where poor workers, most of them women, were treated not as people, but as expendable inputs. For Asian countries leading the Ready-Made Garment industry, particularly Bangladesh, Rana Plaza stands as an enduring example of systemic failure in the governance of business and human rights.
Twelve years after the collapse, the Ready-Made Garment sector has expanded significantly. Important improvements in factory building safety have been achieved, largely through legally binding initiatives such as the Accord on Fire and Building Safety and the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety. Yet despite these developments, the sector now faces a more entrenched crisis: a widening gap between international legal commitments and the harsh commercial realities imposed by global buyers. The recent approval of three key International Labour Organisation conventions by Bangladesh’s interim government has opened a critical window for reform. However, whether these commitments translate into real change depends on how deeply global retailers embed these standards into their purchasing practices. Unequal pricing policies and the continued tolerance of opaque subcontracting arrangements are repeatedly cited as contributing factors behind labour violations and industrial disasters in the sector.
Rana Plaza also exposed long-standing weaknesses within the domestic regulatory environment. Although labour laws existed long before 2013, enforcement mechanisms were persistently weak and in many respects remain so today. The Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments has long been constrained by limited resources, institutional capacity and credibility, allowing violations to continue largely unchecked. More fundamentally, workers’ ability to act as their own monitors has been systematically undermined. Freedom of association, as guaranteed under International Labour Organisation convention no 87, and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining under convention no 98, have been eroded through bureaucratic barriers and widespread anti-union discrimination. Registering trade unions remains an arduous process and independent worker voices inside factories are frequently suppressed, weakening enforcement from the factory floor upward.
Another persistent failure lies in the lack of sustained political attention from successive ruling governments. While rhetorical support for labour reform is often expressed, meaningful legislative progress has been slow. Amendments to labour laws are regularly delayed and frequently fall short of full compliance with International Labour Organisation standards. This failure is not merely administrative but deeply political. The economic dominance of the Ready-Made Garment sector has shielded factory owners from strict accountability, creating institutional tolerance for a low-wage, high-risk labour model that prioritises export competitiveness over worker safety and dignity.
Yet the most decisive pressure within Bangladesh’s supply chain ecosystem is not generated in Dhaka or in Export Processing Zones. It originates in the sourcing offices of major Western brands. Global buying practices driven by fast fashion and relentless price competition have left Bangladeshi suppliers with little bargaining power. Low unit prices, tight lead times and delayed payments compress margins to the point where factories are forced to choose between financial survival and ethical compliance. Investments in occupational safety and health systems, payment of lawful overtime, or even maintaining minimum wages become increasingly difficult under these conditions. Evidence shows that the average unit price paid by European buyers has stagnated or declined, even as demands for sustainability and compliance continue to rise.
This reality exposes the limitations of traditional Corporate Social Responsibility models. Voluntary commitments have repeatedly failed to prevent tragedies such as Rana Plaza and the Tazreen Fashion fire. In this context, mandatory Corporate Due Diligence frameworks offer a more credible path forward. The European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive represents a significant regulatory shift. It requires large European Union and non-European Union companies operating within the European market to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for human rights and environmental harms across their operations and value chains.
The directive rests on three core obligations. First, it extends accountability by allowing civil liability in European courts for failures in due diligence, creating legal avenues for compensation that did not exist after Rana Plaza. Second, it mandates value chain remediation by requiring brands to assess how their own purchasing practices including pricing, production timelines and payment terms contribute to harm within supplier factories. Third, it requires meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders, ensuring that workers, trade unions and labour-focused civil society organisations are formally involved in the design and implementation of due diligence measures.
For Bangladesh, the importance of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive lies in its potential to close long-standing loopholes. Brands sourcing garments from Bangladesh would no longer be able to distance themselves from subcontracting practices or externalise human rights costs. They would be legally compelled to disclose complete supply chains, integrate human rights considerations into pricing decisions and ensure that orders do not foster labour exploitation or environmental harm. In this sense, the directive offers a shift from symbolic assurances to enforceable obligations.
Domestically, the ratification of three International Labour Organisation conventions is a significant step forward. However, their practical value depends on implementation. The forthcoming Bangladesh Labour (Amendment) Ordinance, 2025, must be made genuinely accessible to the millions of workers it seeks to protect. At present, many conventions and policy documents remain available only in English, limiting their relevance for workers who cannot read foreign languages. Translating these materials into Bangla and disseminating them through worker organisations, non-governmental organisations and public education initiatives is essential. Without this effort, newly recognised rights will remain confined to technical documents rather than empowering those they are meant to serve.
International researchers and academics continue to cite Rana Plaza as a defining symbol of Bangladesh’s garment industry, often to the country’s detriment. Yet the collapse also created an opportunity to reshape the sector’s narrative and move towards more ethical sourcing models, similar to those emerging in countries such as Sri Lanka. That opportunity has been repeatedly constrained by weak enforcement and short-term commercial priorities. Binding due diligence regulations such as the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive now present a renewed chance for systemic reform.
Bangladesh has signed international agreements and taken formal steps towards reform. The remaining challenge lies with global brands. Resetting a supply chain long shaped by exploitation requires internalising the cost of human dignity, eliminating tolerance for unmonitored subcontracting and engaging meaningfully with organised workers. The commitments are in place. It is now for the world’s largest buyers to bear the responsibility of making them real.
Shahenoor Akther Urmi, a freelance journalist, studies human rights and democratisation at Mahidol University, Thailand
