Around 300 to 400 Rohingya refugee families in Bangladesh’s Nayapara and Kutupalong registered camps have been cut off from food aid and other essential services after refusing to participate in a biometric data collection drive. The families, many of whom have lived in the camps since fleeing Myanmar in the early 1990s, say the move leaves them without rations, cooking fuel, and access to camp health clinics.
The suspension follows a joint registration exercise by UNHCR, the United Nations’ refugee agency, and the government of Bangladesh, aimed at updating refugee records and issuing new identity documents. The process requires all individuals aged 5 and above to provide fingerprints and iris scans.
UNHCR confirmed the suspensions in a March 17 letter signed by Yoko Akasaka, its Head of Operations in Cox’s Bazar. The letter stated that no humanitarian assistance could be provided to those not biometrically registered. It also confirmed that the new identity cards would not include ethnic identifiers such as “Rohingya” or “Arakan State,” another point of dissatisfaction with many refugees. UNHCR encouraged affected families to present for enrolment “as soon as possible.”
In response to queries, UNHCR defended the policy. A spokesperson wrote: “The use of biometrics in Bangladesh aligns with global standards for identity management and is essential for UNHCR to fulfill its mandate.” They said that biometric systems prevent fraud, ensure efficient aid distribution, and help maintain donor confidence at a time when the Joint Response Plan is underfunded.
Yet UNHCR’s own guidance raises questions about the suspension. Executive Committee Conclusion 91 (2001) describes registration as a protection tool and says aid should be based on need. The agency’s 2015 Data-Protection Policy requires consent to be “freely given, specific and informed.” Several refugee law experts consulted for this report said that tying rations and health care to biometric enrollment appears inconsistent with those standards.
The UNHCR statement added that “no specific protection risks were identified” from suspending distributions and claimed that affected families still had access to education, health care, and civil registration.
But interviews with Rohingya representatives contradict this. Mohammed Iqbal from Kutupalong said, “People have been turned away at clinics after showing the old documentation.” Abu Taleb from Nayapara added, “They say education is available, but when our children are hungry and can’t buy books, how can they study?”
Privacy International, a leading digital rights organization, expressed concern over the use of biometric registration as a condition for receiving aid.
“The decision to deploy a tech- and data-intensive system should never lead to exclusion, and the decision of a person… not to be registered should never lead to a denial of access to services,” the group said in a statement.
“This is particularly important given the skewed power dynamics in the delivery of humanitarian assistance, where consent is not a freely given choice because saying no could mean not accessing life-saving services.”
The affected families have pursued multiple non-violent avenues. On March 3 they staged a peaceful sit-in outside the Nayapara Camp-in-Charge’s office, and on April 27 they sent registered letters to the Cox’s Bazar Deputy Commissioner, the Refugee Relief and Repatriation Commissioner, and the UNHCR country representative in Dhaka, appealing for rations to be restored.
UNHCR says its data protection framework complies with international standards and that refugees are informed about how their data will be used. But the affected families argue they never received proper consent forms in Bangla or Rohingya, and they worry that their information could be shared with Bangladeshi or Myanmar authorities.
The community has now submitted a complaint to four U.N. Special Rapporteurs, including those on food rights and privacy. They are calling for the immediate reinstatement of food and fuel distributions and an independent review of the registration process.
Despite UNHCR’s insistence that biometric enrollment is necessary to uphold program integrity, critics say the policy effectively punishes people for trying to protect their identity and data. Abu Taleb argued that families are “being forced to choose between hunger and submission to biometrics,” a claim UNHCR disputes.