Complaints rise, justice unclear
Medical negligence in Bangladesh has moved from isolated public anger to a national accountability question. From wrong treatment allegations and unlicensed facilities to delayed investigations and weak complaint mechanisms, the issue now sits at the centre of health-sector reform debates.
The most difficult question is also the most important: how many incidents of medical negligence have occurred in Bangladesh so far? The answer is that no complete national figure exists.
Bangladesh does not yet maintain a single public registry that records all complaints, investigations, court cases, disciplinary actions, settlements and deaths linked to alleged medical negligence.
However, available data shows the scale is far larger than formal complaint numbers suggest. A Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics survey conducted in 2025 found that 38 percent of respondents reported experiencing negligence, carelessness, poor care or maltreatment while seeking treatment at hospitals.
The rate was higher in urban areas, 44 percent, than in rural areas, 36 percent. The survey covered 8,256 households across all 64 districts, making it one of the strongest recent indicators of public experience with the health system.
Yet complaints rarely become formal cases. The same survey found that 65 percent of respondents did not know where to report medical negligence, while another 11 percent had no idea about the complaint process. Only 24 percent said they knew where to complain.
This gap between experience and reporting is one of the biggest reasons the real number of negligence incidents remains unknown.
The Bangladesh Medical and Dental Council, is the main professional body responsible for dealing with complaints against doctors. Official statistics showed that BMDC had received 455 complaints against physicians since 2010. Compared with the BBS survey findings, this number appears very small. Health-rights campaigners say the low complaint count reflects public distrust, lack of awareness and the complexity of pursuing justice.
Farida Akhter, convener of Shasthya Andolon, has argued that a “neutral body” is needed to build trust in the complaint system. Her concern reflects a long-standing criticism: complaints against doctors are often investigated within a structure dominated by medical professionals.
Recent disciplinary action shows that proven negligence does reach BMDC, but slowly and selectively. In March 2026, BMDC suspended the registrations of 10 doctors for periods ranging from six months to two years. The cases were linked to deaths of four patients and financial harm caused by incorrect medical reporting. Some doctors were connected to circumcision-related deaths of children, while others were linked to deaths during caesarean operations at an unregistered facility.
The High Court has also expressed concern. In January 2025, while hearing a case related to the death of five-year-old Ayan Ahmed after a circumcision procedure, the court reportedly observed: “Medical negligence is rampant everywhere.” A probe committee in that case found serious lapses, including an unlicensed hospital, procedural violations and failures in pre- and post-operative care.
The regulatory weakness is not limited to individual doctors. The Directorate General of Health Services informed the court in 2024 that Bangladesh had 15,233 licensed private hospitals and clinics, but only 4,123 had renewed licences. Another 1,027 hospitals and clinics were operating without any licence. This raises a serious question: can medical negligence be reduced without first fixing facility-level regulation?
Legal remedies exist, but they are fragmented. Victims may file complaints with BMDC for professional misconduct. They may pursue criminal action under the Penal Code when negligence causes death or serious harm. Civil suits for compensation are also possible. Consumer rights law may provide another route, as patients can be treated as service recipients. Writ petitions may be filed where public interest or failure of regulatory bodies is involved.
Supreme Court lawyer Rakib Ahmed Chowdhury told The New Nation that Bangladesh lacks a dedicated, patient-friendly medical negligence law. Existing routes are slow, expensive and difficult for ordinary families.
“Proving negligence requires medical records, expert opinion, proof of duty of care, breach of that duty and a causal link between the breach and harm. In practice, families often face hospitals that control the documents and doctors who are reluctant to testify against colleagues.”
The government has drafted a Patient Protection and Remedy Ordinance, 2025. The draft proposes mandatory review and documentation of serious adverse events, including wrong-patient or wrong-organ surgery, retained foreign material after surgery and serious medication errors causing death or permanent harm. It also proposes Medical Negligence and Patient Rights Tribunals, including judicial officers, medical experts and patient-rights representatives. If enacted and enforced properly, it could become a turning point.
Still, some provisions have drawn concern. Critics say alternative dispute resolution, including apology or compensation, should not become a shortcut that allows serious negligence to escape accountability. Legal analysts argue that ADR may help in minor disputes, but deaths, permanent disability, fraud and unauthorised treatment must face strong investigation and punishment.
Public health expert Khairul Islam said the BBS survey revealed “many weaknesses” in the health sector. That weakness is visible in three layers: patients often do not know where to complain; regulators lack transparency and speed; and courts become involved only after major tragedies.
