chinerakhun.com
chinerakhun.com was a crowdsourced Bangladeshi registry created during the July–August 2024 student-led protests to identify people accused of attacking demonstrators, but by October 1, 2026, the domain was no longer hosting the original project and instead redirected to a GoDaddy page offering it for sale.
What was chinerakhun.com created to do?
Chine Rakhun appeared in August 2024 as one of several digital projects built around Bangladesh’s student-led protest movement. The Daily Star identified Shabab Junayed and Nur Mohammad Mamun as the developers and reported that the site was created to help identify people accused of attacking unarmed students.
Shabab told The Daily Star that the project was meant to support accountability by documenting alleged attackers in a form that people could search and expand.
Rather than operating like a news site, chinerakhun.com functioned more like a public registry. Contemporary coverage by Northeast News described it as a living document that could grow as users submitted new information. Entries reportedly included names, photographs, positions or affiliations, locations, and short descriptions of alleged incidents.
That distinction is important. A person appearing on the site was not the same as that person being convicted, formally charged, or found responsible by an independent investigation. The database recorded allegations collected by a civic project, so individual entries needed separate verification.
How did it fit into Bangladesh’s wider digital documentation effort?
Chine Rakhun was only one part of a much larger wave of online documentation that emerged around the 2024 protests.
The Daily Star highlighted several other projects created during the same period. Shohid.info documented people who were killed. The Inquilab collected news reports and personal accounts. BD Fund Bank helped organize fundraising, while Protirodh mapped community-safety reports and incidents.
Other online directories also placed Chine Rakhun within this broader ecosystem. All Eyes on BD listed it among notable protest-related resources in August 2024. A July-36 archive page published in March 2025 continued to catalogue the project alongside other websites connected with the July uprising.
What made chinerakhun.com different was its focus on identifying alleged perpetrators rather than simply preserving events, casualties, or testimony. That made the site potentially valuable to researchers and investigators, but it also raised a higher bar for accuracy. Naming a person in connection with alleged violence carries different consequences from recording a protest timeline or preserving photographs.
Where did the site’s information come from?
According to The Daily Star, the project relied heavily on social media material and submissions from the public. Its developers said they had received a large amount of information and were working through it as the database expanded.
Some of that material later survived outside the original website. An AntiQuotaBD blog post published on August 21, 2024 reproduced a lengthy set of entries attributed to Chine Rakhun. Copies like this can help researchers understand what the database contained at a particular moment, but they also show the limitations of relying on material that has been reposted elsewhere.
For example, one copied entry reportedly used the impossible date “July 33.” A mistake like that may be minor in isolation, but it illustrates a larger problem: once information is copied from one site to another, errors can spread along with accurate material.
The surviving public coverage reviewed for this article does not clearly explain whether chinerakhun.com used a formal verification standard for each submission. It also does not provide a clear public record of its evidence requirements, correction process, right-of-reply system, or version history.
That does not establish that such safeguards never existed. It simply means they cannot be reliably reconstructed from the public material that remains available.
How does later evidence change the way the site should be read?
Subsequent investigations confirmed that the wider violence surrounding the 2024 protests was severe.
In February 2025, the United Nations Human Rights Office reported that as many as 1,400 people may have been killed between July 1 and August 15, 2024, while thousands more were injured. Its fact-finding investigation found reasonable grounds to believe that the former government, security and intelligence services, and violent elements associated with the Awami League systematically committed serious human-rights violations.
The UN also documented retaliatory killings and other revenge attacks against police officers, Awami League officials and supporters, journalists, and members of minority communities.
Those findings help explain why citizen-led documentation projects such as Chine Rakhun emerged. People were trying to record events in the middle of a fast-moving and violent political crisis.
However, the UN’s findings should not be treated as automatic confirmation of every allegation that appeared on chinerakhun.com. The UN investigation drew on interviews, medical records, forensic work, weapons analysis, and large amounts of audiovisual evidence. A crowdsourced website entry did not necessarily undergo the same level of scrutiny.
For that reason, material from Chine Rakhun is most useful as a historical record or investigative lead unless an individual claim can also be supported by independent evidence.
What happened to chinerakhun.com?
This is where older coverage can now be misleading if read without an update.
As of October 1, 2026, chinerakhun.com no longer hosted the original registry. Visiting the domain redirected users to a GoDaddy page advertising the domain for sale.
That means the original database is no longer accessible through the address that contemporary news reports and resource lists pointed to.
The disappearance also highlights a broader problem with digital archives created during moments of crisis. A project can attract widespread attention while events are unfolding, yet preserving it for years afterward requires stable hosting, continued funding, domain ownership, backups, and people willing to maintain the platform.
News articles, search results, copied pages, and web archives may preserve parts of what once existed, but those fragments are not a complete substitute for the original database. They may lack timestamps, source files, edits, deleted entries, or records showing how information changed over time.
No clearly identifiable official replacement for chinerakhun.com appeared in the material reviewed for this article. Researchers looking into the project therefore need to work from contemporary reporting, archived versions where available, and independent documentary evidence rather than assuming that an unofficial copy is complete.
Why does chinerakhun.com still matter?
Chine Rakhun remains useful as a case study in how quickly digital tools can emerge during a political crisis.
It showed how ordinary citizens and developers could turn scattered photographs, posts, names, and eyewitness material into a searchable record while events were still unfolding. In situations where official records are incomplete or contested, that kind of documentation can preserve information that might otherwise disappear.
At the same time, the project illustrates the risks that come with publicly identifying people based on crowdsourced claims. Verification standards, source preservation, correction mechanisms, and clear distinctions between allegations and established findings become especially important when a database names real individuals.
There is also a preservation lesson. A civic archive can disappear surprisingly quickly once its domain, hosting, or volunteer support ends. Future projects of this kind can reduce that risk by keeping original source material, recording when and how entries were verified, maintaining correction and appeal procedures, and storing independent archival copies.
chinerakhun.com is no longer the live registry it was in 2024, but its short history still says a great deal about digital documentation during Bangladesh’s July uprising: how quickly such projects can become important, how difficult their claims can be to verify, and how easily the record itself can vanish if long-term preservation is not built in from the start.