TWELVE years after the collapse of the Rana Plaza building justice remains out of reach for the families of 1,138 victims and 1,169 injured workers.

Despite the scale of the tragedy, judicial proceedings against the owners of the building and the five factories it housed remain stalled, with multiple cases still pending in both labour and criminal courts.

According to a report by the Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST), there had been no substantial movement in either the labour or criminal cases linked to the tragedy, which remained one of the deadliest industrial disasters in history.

The report highlighted ongoing delays, poor case management, and a lack of transparency in the judicial process.

The report said that the majority of the accused remained free on bail or have yet to be arrested, and many of the cases showed no signs of resolution.

Survivors and families of the deceased continued to wait, uncertain whether they would see accountability or closure in their lifetime.

Labour law cases: limited progress, missing records

Eleven cases under the labour law had been filed by the Department of Inspections for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) against the owners and employers of the Rana Plaza factories. As of April 2025, all remained pending.

Four of these cases were awaiting Execution Reports (ER), with arrest warrants having been issued against the accused. These cases were scheduled to return to court on 30 April 2025.

Three cases had reportedly been transferred to the Second Labour Court in Dhaka; however, no official documentation of these transfers was available.

For the remaining four cases, no relevant information could be located in the court register, raising serious concerns about systemic inefficiencies and lack of accountability.

Criminal cases: hearings delayed

Three criminal cases related to the Rana Plaza building collapse remained unresolved as of April 2025.

In the case filed under the Building Construction Act, 1952, the investigation report was submitted in May 2015 and accepted in July of the same year.

The case was subsequently transferred to the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhaka.

However, proceedings were stayed by the High Court Division. Although the last hearing date had been set for 23 November 2023, no further dates were scheduled.

The case record was later transferred to the Session Judge Court (Session Case No. 559/2016).

Two additional cases filed under the Penal Code—one by the police and another by the widow of a deceased worker—had been ongoing for nearly a decade.

Despite a directive from the Appellate Division on  January 15, 2024 to resolve the cases within six months, both remained pending before the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Dhaka.

By April 2025, 93 prosecution witnesses had been examined. The next hearing was scheduled for 15 April 2025.

Writ petition pending

In addition to the labour and criminal proceedings, four writ petitions and one suo moto rule remained pending before the High Court Division.

These included a petition filed by BLAST, which sought a full investigation into the collapse, legal action against those responsible, and compensation for victims. All five matters awaited final hearing.

Accused largely free

Most of the individuals accused in the various proceedings remained out on bail, or had outstanding arrest warrants that had yet to be enforced.

Sohel Rana, the owner of the Rana Plaza building, was the only accused still in custody as of April 2025, awaiting the outcome of trial.

A long wait for justice 

The continued delays in resolving the cases fuelled deep frustration among survivors and the families of those who perished.

Many expressed doubt that justice would be served in their lifetime. Observers noted that the prolonged legal process not only eroded public confidence in the judicial system but also undermined efforts to ensure safer and more accountable working conditions within Bangladesh’s garment sector.

Legal experts and labour rights advocates reiterated calls for a transparent and expedited judicial process.

Twelve years is far too long to wait for justice. A credible legal outcome is essential to uphold the dignity of the victims and to restore trust in the system,’ they said