Author: Kazi Ashraf Uddin, Doctoral candidate at UNSW Sydney and Erasmus+ visiting student at Law school of University of Milano-Bicocca (Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza)
Committee: Eppo & Immigration Committee
Date: 23/07/2025
[…] the EU remains committed to stand by the side of the Rohingya for as long as it takes. We will continue to support both refugees and host communities in Cox’s Bazar, as well as the vulnerable Rohingya people left in Myanmar. At the same time, the EU continues to work to secure the conditions for the safe, dignified and sustainable return of the Rohingya to Myanmar” (Janez Lenarčič, EU Commissioner for Crisis Management, 2019).
Introduction:
The European Union often presents itself as a global champion of human rights, gender equality, and humanitarian aid. But, when it comes to the Rohingya refugee crisis in Bangladesh, one vulnerable group remains frequently overlooked: transgender Rohingya individuals, those who identify themselves as Rohingya hijras as an attempt to culturally integrate into the Bangladeshi gender non-binary subculture of the hijras. Their struggles remain largely invisible in international human rights discourses and humanitarian efforts.
So, who are the transgender Rohingya refugees or Rohingya Hijras?
The Rohingya hijras, or transgender Rohingya refugees, represent a deeply marginalised segment of the displaced Rohingya population. Their gender identities and expressions diverge from binary norms and the biologically assigned sex at birth, placing them at the intersection of multiple vulnerabilities.
According to fieldwork conducted by doctoral researcher Kazi Ashraf Uddin (UNSW Sydney), thousands of transgender Rohingya individuals reside in the refugee camps of Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. These individuals face persistent sexual and gender-based violence, discrimination, and communal hostility. Their marginalisation is compounded by the lack of legal recognition and cultural stigma in both Myanmar and Bangladesh, rendering them invisible in humanitarian data and policy frameworks.
Despite often playing vital roles within their households—particularly in securing humanitarian aid and rations—transgender Rohingya refugees are frequently subjected to domestic abuse due to their gender identity. Neither their homes nor the broader camp environment offers safety, and their freedom of movement is routinely obstructed.
Moreover, intra-community violence and faith-based insurgency frequently position transgender individuals as collateral victims. The convergence of gender identity, refugee status, economic precarity, religious extremism, and sexual exploitation makes transgender Rohingya refugees among the most vulnerable in the context of forced displacement. Their experiences reflect some of the most severe human rights violations occurring within refugee camps today.
Role of the European Union in the External Human Rights Diplomacy:
The European Union’s response to the Rohingya crisis is grounded in its legal obligations under the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Charter of Fundamental Rights. The Directorate General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid (DG ECHO) has already proved its commitment to the Rohingya refugee crisis by providing over € 32.8 million in aid to the Rohingya refugees and the host community and by providing advocacy and coordination aligned with Article 21 of the TEU in its pledge to sustainability, peace, and security that constitutes its external humanitarian actions. However, there was no explicit targeting or inclusion of gender-diverse groups such as the transgender individuals in the aid distribution or the programming framework (according to the 2021 Independent Evaluation Report commissioned by DG ECHO).
The EU has also demonstrated its strong commitment to the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) that aligns with EU asylum and migration law, though the Rohingyas are not seeking asylum in Europe. In addition, the EU’s approach towards gender equality, child protection, and mental health support aligns with GCR’s emphasis on intersectional and inclusive humanitarian approaches. To advance its commitment to inclusive humanitarian action, the EU channels its aid—particularly through DG ECHO—under the guiding principles of non-discrimination and gender sensitivity. These principles are not merely ethical aspirations; they are legally grounded in Article 8 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
The EU-funded humanitarian initiatives in Bangladesh—implemented through partners like UN Women, IOM, and other NGOs—are required to adopt gender-sensitive and non-discriminatory approaches, including LGBQI+ inclusion. For example, under the EU–UN Women Partnership on Gender Equality (2025), the EU signed a €4.8 million agreement with UN Women to prevent sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in public spaces, workplaces, and tertiary educational institutions in Bangladesh that aligns with Bangladesh’s National Action Plan to Prevent Violence Against Women and Children (NAPVAWC).
UNHCR, UN Women, and UNFPA have been working to integrate gender- and diversity-sensitive programming in the refugee camps that includes support for LGBTQ+ individuals, often under broader protection mandates, and INGOs like CARE Bangladesh, ActionAid, and BRAC have conducted intersectional gender analyses to understand the unique vulnerabilities of the marginalised groups. In its Joint Response Plan (JRP) launched in 2025, the EU has also emphasised the unprecedented strain in global humanitarian funding and the importance of encouraging the self-reliance of the Rohingya refugees. Through the JRP, the EU has also expressed their commitment to collaborate with UN agencies and INGOs to ensure non-discriminatory access to services, including safe spaces, psychological support, livelihood training, and protection from gender-based violence.
How can the EU ameliorate its pledge to uphold global human rights in its external funding schemes in the context of mass displacement and refugee crises?
1. Through normative influence and conditionality as a tool for inclusion: Although EU law does not apply to Bangladesh, the EU’s commitment to LGBTQI+ rights can shape humanitarian practices through funding and partnerships by embedding the non-discrimination clauses and gender inclusion standards. The EU can leverage its conditional funding mechanisms to ensure that humanitarian aid recipients adopt inclusive policies. This conditional funding mechanism can require the funding recipients to ensure gender and sexuality diversity training, inclusive research and data collection, and targeted protection measures. As a part of the inclusive research, the conditionality should also include involving the local researchers to conduct intersectional studies involving gender-diverse participants. As a major donor in global humanitarian aid, the EU can encourage INGOs and UN agencies to collect disaggregated data on gender identity and sexual orientation.
2. Intersectionality in EU Rights Discourse: To uphold the commitment to intersectionality of the EU’s Gender Equality Strategy’s (2020-2025) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the EU should ensure its external policies address the compounded vulnerabilities of transgender Rohingya refugees by promoting inclusive, rights-based humanitarian responses. By applying an intersectional legal lens tailored to the targeted cultural group, the EU could ensure funding for safe spaces, trauma-informed care, and legal support adapted to the needs of the transgender Rohingya individuals.
3. Enhancing accountability and monitoring: As EU legal discourses emphasise rights-based accountability, this can be translated into a monitoring framework to oversee whether refugee protection programs are inclusive of and sensitive to transgender and other marginalised groups. Moreover, having a reporting mechanism allowing transgender Rohingya refugees to safely report discrimination will also boost accountability in funding. Moreover, having Rohingya transgender refugees within the aid programs will help to ensure the accountability for the targeted aid.
4. European Public Prosecutor’s Office’s (EPPO) role in fund oversight: It is important to investigate if EU-funded programs are being misused to marginalise or exploit the vulnerable subgroups. EPPO can oversight any misappropriation and fraudulent use of EU humanitarian aid allocated to the NGOs or local partners. They can work with the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and DG ECHO to audit the money flow and to detect any irregularities in the field operations. This oversight is particularly important in the contexts where aid distribution often lacks transparency and marginalised groups are often excluded from the protection mechanisms, a common grievance most transgender Rohingya refugees often shared with the interviewer. Moreover, EPPO’s mandate can be extended to encourage preventive measures such as requiring the implementing partners to adopt inclusive financial reporting standards and to document how funds are used to support intersectional and gender-diverse populations. By integrating intersectional justice into their oversight framework, EPPO can contribute more to an ethical and rights-based approach to humanitarian funding—one that reflects the EU’s foundational values and legal commitments.
However, EPPO’s territorial jurisdiction as outlined in Article 23 of the EPPO regulation poses jurisdictional limitations in the contexts of external humanitarian funds since EPPO’s mandate is confined to offences committed by EU Member States or by EU nationals, or by EU staff abroad. These jurisdictional limitations cause concern over EPPO’s capacity to investigate fraud or misappropriation of fund in third countries like Bangladesh.
Therefore, a recommended way for the EU to bridge this jurisdictional gap can be exploring enhanced cooperation mechanism with third country authorities and international organisations. For example, Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) or bilateral agreements with host countries like Bangladesh could allow for joint audits, data sharing, and investigative collaboration. Another avenue to explore could be to establish extraterritorial accountability framework through contractual obligations in funding agreements requiring the implementing partners to adhere to the EU standards of transparency.
5. Funding intersectional human rights research: Human rights can be violated in several ways, and many instances of human rights violations are embedded within a critical tension between cultural rights and human rights. Within its jurisdiction, the funding scheme of the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) may engage local civil society organisations and researchers outside the EU to promote context-based understanding and research about humanitarian crises and human rights violations. For example, to understand the multi-layered GBV the transgender Rohingya refugees encounter, it is crucial to understand the local geopolitical and cultural context of forced displacement in that region.
Conclusion:
To embody its commitment to human rights and intersectional justice, the European Union must ensure that its external humanitarian funding mechanisms recognise and respond to the compounded vulnerabilities of transgender Rohingya refugees. By including inclusive conditionality, enhancing accountability, and supporting context-sensitive research, the EU can move one step forward in promoting dignity, safety, and justice for all displaced individuals—regardless of gender identity. Intersectional justice should not be seen just as a policy goal; it is a moral imperative in the context of global displacement.