Home / Archive / Vol. 2 No.1 (2026)/Article

Fragmented Legal Pluralism and the Security–Rights Nexus: A Theoretical Lens on Governance and Legal Gaps in Rohingya Repatriation in Bangladesh

Keywords

Abstract

This paper examines the Rohingya refugee crisis in Bangladesh through the theoretical lens of fragmented legal pluralism, utilizing a socio-legal methodology to analyse the critical intersection of national security and refugee rights. The central research question investigates how the deliberate legal and governance vacuums surrounding Rohingya repatriation generate volatile, pluralistic legal orders. By refusing to grant formal refugee status and denying access to formal justice, the state relies on the traditional ideology of legal centralism as a mechanism of demographic and political control. However, this socio-legal analysis demonstrates that the deliberate withdrawal of formal state law does not secure sovereignty; rather, it creates a dangerous regulatory void rapidly filled by unregulated non-state actors. Internally, informal camp leaders (Majhis) and armed factions dictate camp governance, breeding exploitation, radicalization, and severe domestic insecurity. Externally, however, this gap is further exacerbated by the dichotomy between state-focused repatriation diplomacy and the reality of fragmentation within Myanmar’s territory, wherein the Arakan Army (AA) controls certain areas. Hence, the violation of basic refugee rights becomes a direct threat to national and regional security. In order to address this long-standing stalemate, the paper calls for an approach based on cosmopolitan and complementary pluralism. The first step towards addressing the problem requires the creation of a comprehensive national refugee law in Bangladesh that can reassert state authority, provide legal identity, and disrupt any normative networks involved in human trafficking and smuggling. At the same time, a diplomacy process involving de facto authorities in the region is indispensable.

References

Amnesty International. (2025). Myanmar: Rohingya repatriation ‘catastrophic’ under existing conditions in northern Rakhine State. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/09/myanmar-rohingya-repatriation-catastrophic-under-existing-conditions-in-northern-rakhine-state/

Aung, B. (2025). Rakhine reset: India, Bangladesh turn to AA as Myanmar junta ousted. South Asia Journal. https://southasiajournal.net/rakhine-reset-india-bangladesh-turn-to-aa-as-myanmar-junta-ousted/

Beech, H. (2017, September 18). China backs Myanmar on Rohingya crisis, dismaying rights advocates. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/world/asia/china-myanmar-rohingya.html

Berman, P. S. (2012). Global legal pluralism: A jurisprudence of law beyond borders. Cambridge University Press.

Burger, J. (2014). Indigenous peoples, extractive industries and human rights. European Parliament Subcommittee on Human Rights.

Carothers, T. (1998). The rule of law revival. Foreign Affairs, 77(2), 95–106.

Cover, R. (1983). Foreword: Nomos and narrative. Harvard Law Review, 97, 4–68.

Dayal, K. (2023). Legal pluralism and the politics: A study. International Journal of Law Management & Humanities, 6(2), 2151–2164.

Ellickson, R. (1991). Order without law: How neighbors settle disputes. Harvard University Press.

Faisal, M. Z. (2025). The Rohingya refugee crisis in Bangladesh: Geopolitical implications, human security concerns, and repatriation politics. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(9), 4379–4392. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.909000359

Ferdous, J., & Emrah, A. (2025). Stalled repatriation of Rohingya refugees: Diplomatic hurdles, regional politics, and the path to sustainable solutions. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.70037

Galanter, M. (1974). Why the 'haves' come out ahead: Speculations on the limits of legal change. Law & Society Review, 9(1), 95–160.

Griffiths, J. (1986). What is legal pluralism? Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 24, 1–55.

Griffiths, J. (2005). The ideal of sociology of law and its relation to law and to legal pluralism. Recht der Werkelijkheid, 26(3), 73–94.

Gurvitch, G. (1935). L'expérience juridique et la philosophie pluraliste du droit. Éditions A. Pedone.

Hasan, S. (2025, January). Beyond the Naf: Contemplating a realpolitik solution to the Rohingya refugee crisis. Policy Watcher. https://policywatcher.com/2025/01/beyond-the-naf-contemplating-a-realpolitik-solution-to-the-rohingya-refugee-crisis

Hooker, M. B. (1975). Legal pluralism: An introduction to colonial and neo-colonial laws. Clarendon Press.

Human Rights Watch. (2023). Bangladesh: Rohingya refugees in crisis - HRW World Report. https://www.hrw.org

International Crisis Group. (2017). Myanmar’s Rohingya crisis enters a dangerous new phase (Asia Report No. 292).

International Crisis Group. (2020). Myanmar: An avoidable war: Politics and armed conflict in Myanmar’s Rakhine State (Asia Report No. 307).

International Crisis Group. (2023). Myanmar: The politics of Rakhine State and the return of the Rohingya. https://www.crisisgroup.org

Islam, F. (2025). An uncertain future: The legal and geopolitical dimensions of the Rohingya refugee crisis for Bangladesh. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394049973_An_Uncertain_Future_The_Legal_and_Geopolitical_dimensions_of_the_Rohingya_Refugee_Crisis_for_Bangladesh

Islam, M. S., & Mia, M. E. (2024). Navigating legal and humanitarian challenges regarding the Rohingya refugee crisis in Bangladesh. International Journal of Social Inquiry, 17(3), 467−491. https://doi.org/10.37093/ijsi.1487343

Islam, R. (2020). Domestic constraints and refugee policy in Bangladesh: The Rohingya case. Journal of South Asian Politics, 12(4), 233–245.

Krygier, M. (2011). The rule of law and legal pluralism. In B. Z. Tamanaha, C. Sage, & M. Woolcock (Eds.), Legal pluralism and development: Scholars and practitioners in dialogue (pp. 19–21). Cambridge University Press.

Mac Ginty, R. (2008). Indigenous peace-making versus the liberal peace. Cooperation and Conflict, 43(2), 139–163.

Machiavelli, N. (1513). The prince.

Merry, S. E. (1988). Legal pluralism. Law & Society Review, 22, 869–896.

Moore, S. F. (1973). Law and social change: The semi-autonomous social field as an appropriate subject of study. Law & Society Review, 7(4), 719–746.

O’Donovan, D. (2016). Socio-legal methodology: Conceptual underpinnings, justifications and practical pitfalls. In C. McConnachie (Ed.), Legal research methods: Principles and practicalities (pp. 31–58). Clarus Press.

Pahuja, S. (2011). Decolonising international law: Development, economic growth and the politics of universality. Cambridge University Press.

Parvez, M. (2024). Student protest and Hasina's downfall in Bangladesh: Causes and consequences. The Diplomates World.

Parvez, M. (2025). Between diplomacy and displacement: The contradictions of the Rohingya repatriation discourse. Observer Research Foundation. https://www.orfonline.org/research/between-diplomacy-and-displacement-the-contradictions-of-the-rohingya-repatriation-discourse

Rahman, M. (2022). Refugees and political realignments in fragile states: Lessons from Lebanon. Journal of Global Humanitarian Studies, 6(2), 135–152.

Rajah, J. (2012). Authoritarian rule of law: Legislation, discourse and legitimacy in Singapore. Cambridge University Press.

Riaz, A., & Karim, A. (2018). Bangladesh’s response to the Rohingya crisis: Political challenges and policy directions. South Asian Journal of International Relations, 24(3), 200–217.

Santos, B. de S. (2002). Toward a new legal common sense: Law, globalization, and emancipation. Butterworths LexisNexis.

Sejan, S. S., & Siddiq, A. B. (2025, October). Rohingya refugees and their crises in criminal justice. Oxford Law Blogs. https://blogs.law.ox.ac.uk/border-criminologies-blog/blog-post/2025/10/rohingya-refugees-and-their-crises-criminal-justice

Singh, R., & Yadav, V. (2025). The Rohingya crisis: A humanitarian disaster and its impact on South Asia’s geopolitics. Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Science, 13(1), 140–143. https://doi.org/10.35629/9467-1301140143

Southwick, K. (2015). Preventing mass atrocities against the stateless Rohingya in Myanmar: A call for solutions. Journal of International Affairs, 68(2), 137–156.

Swenson, G. (2018). Legal pluralism in theory and practice. International Studies Review, 20(0), 1–25.

Tamanaha, B. Z. (2001). A general jurisprudence of law and society. Oxford University Press.

Tamanaha, B. Z. (2008). Understanding legal pluralism: Past to present, local to global. Sydney Law Review, 30, 375–411.

Tamanaha, B. Z. (2021). Legal pluralism explained: History, theory, consequences. Oxford University Press.

The Daily Star. (2025). Rohingya crisis: Political solution, not aid, only way out. https://www.thedailystar.net/rohingya-influx/news/rohingya-crisis-political-solution-not-aid-only-way-out-3994031

Transnational Institute. (2022). Arakan Army and the politics of ethnic armed resistance in Myanmar. https://www.tni.org/en/publication/arakan-army-and-the-politics-of-ethnic-armed-resistance-in-myanmar

Tribune Report. (2025). Bangladesh warns UN it cannot host 1.3 million Rohingyas any longer. Dhaka Tribune. https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/rohingya-crisis/396862/bangladesh-seeks-urgent-international-actions-for

Ullah, A. A. (2017). Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh: The political economy of migration and refugee protection. Asian Journal of Social Science, 45(6), 631–645.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR]. (2020, December). Rohingya refugee response – Operational update.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR]. (2023, March). Rohingya emergency: Situation overview. https://www.unhcr.org

van Vollenhoven, C. (1909). Miskenningen van het adatrecht [Misevaluation of adat law]. Brill.

Vanderlinden, J. (1971). Le pluralisme juridique: Essai de synthèse. In J. Gilissen (Ed.), Le pluralisme juridique (pp. 19–56). Université Libre de Bruxelles.

Waldorf, L. (2006). Mass justice for mass atrocity: Rethinking local justice as transitional justice. Temple Law Review, 79(1), 1–87.

Woodman, G. (1998). Ideological combat and social observation: Recent debate about legal pluralism. Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 42, 21–59.

Zumbansen, P. (2016). The rule of law, legal pluralism, and challenges to a Western-centric view: Some very preliminary observations. King's College London Legal Studies Research Paper Series.