Rana Plaza Collapse Bangladesh 2013: What Happened, Who Was Responsible, and What Changed

Every April, garment workers, labour rights organisations, and fashion sustainability advocates commemorate a significant anniversary. They remember one of the most consequential industrial disasters of the 21st century. The Rana Plaza collapse did not just kill people. It broke a myth: the idea that supply chain responsibility ends at the factory gate.

What Exactly Happened at Rana Plaza on 24 April 2013?

The Rana Plaza building was an eight-storey commercial complex in Savar, on the outskirts of Dhaka. It was illegally extended to nine floors. It housed five garment factories, several shops, and a bank. The factories produced clothing for major international brands sold across Europe, North America, and beyond.

On 23 April 2013, visible cracks appeared in the building’s structure. Engineers and local officials were alerted. The bank and shops on the lower floors closed immediately. Garment factory managers, facing production deadlines, ordered their workers back the following morning. At 8:57 am on 24 April, the building collapsed. More than 3,600 workers were inside. Of those, 1,134 were killed, and over 2,500 were injured, many with permanent disabilities. Most of the victims were women.

The collapse was not an accident in the conventional sense. It was the foreseeable result of illegal construction and ignored warnings. A production-over-safety logic ran through every level of the supply chain, from building owner to brand buyer.

Which Brands Were Producing Clothes in Rana Plaza?

Labour rights organisations and journalists investigated factories inside Rana Plaza. They confirmed that these factories were producing garments for Inditex (Zara), Primark, Mango, Bonmarche, Matalan, Walmart, Joe Fresh, and others. Some brands initially denied involvement. Label evidence recovered from the rubble and shipping records made many denials untenable.

The response differed sharply by brand. Primark paid into compensation funds and was considered relatively proactive. Walmart and Loblaw (Joe Fresh’s parent) participated in a North American accountability mechanism. Others took months to acknowledge any connection, and some maintained they were unaware their suppliers were subcontracting to factories inside the building.

That last point became central to supply chain accountability debates that continue into 2026: brands routinely lack visibility beyond their Tier 1 suppliers, and that invisibility became a structural defence against accountability. New due diligence laws in the EU and Germany were designed specifically to close that gap. You can read more about how those obligations work in our post on conflict minerals and CSDDD due diligence requirements.

Who Was Held Responsible and Was Anyone Convicted?

Sohel Rana, the building’s owner, was arrested days after the collapse while attempting to flee to India. He was convicted in 2017 of concealing assets. A longer murder trial has proceeded slowly through the Bangladeshi court system. As of the most recent available reporting, the murder case involving 38 accused had not reached a final verdict, reflecting the broader pattern of delayed justice that survivors and labour rights groups have repeatedly condemned.

Factory owners, engineers who certified the illegal extension, and local government officials were also charged. Most remained on bail for years. The pace of proceedings drew sustained criticism from the International Labour Organization and international human rights bodies.

No international brand executive faced criminal prosecution in any jurisdiction. This remained a point of contention: the structural conditions that made the disaster possible were shaped as much by brand purchasing practices, pricing pressures, and audit systems that prioritised quality over safety, as by local actors.

How Much Compensation Did Brands Pay to Rana Plaza Survivors?

The Rana Plaza Arrangement, coordinated by the ILO, raised approximately USD $30 million in compensation from brands, governments, and other donors. The target had been $40 million. Survivors and the families of those killed received payments, but many reported that the amounts were inadequate relative to the lifetime loss of income and the medical costs associated with permanent injuries.

Research by Transparency International Bangladesh found that more than half of survivors remained unemployed years after the disaster, with most unable to return to garment work due to physical and psychological injury. Lifetime medical care, educational support for victims’ children, and ongoing rehabilitation were demands that labour organisations continued to press, with inconsistent results.

What Is the International Accord and How Did It Come From Rana Plaza?

The Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh is the most durable institutional legacy of Rana Plaza. It was signed in May 2013 by over 200 brands and retailers from more than 20 countries. Global trade unions IndustriALL and UNI Global Union also joined the agreement. Unlike previous voluntary corporate social responsibility commitments, the Accord was legally binding. Brands were contractually obligated to fund safety inspections. They had to ensure remediation. They also needed to maintain purchasing relationships with factories that cooperated with safety requirements.

The Accord covered over 1,600 factories and conducted tens of thousands of inspections. It represented a structural departure from the audit-only model that had dominated supply chain safety governance. A similar initiative existed in North America. The Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety took a less binding approach. This initiative expired in 2018.

In 2021, the Bangladesh Accord transitioned into the International Accord for Health and Safety in the Textile and Garment Industry. This change extended the model beyond Bangladesh to Pakistan. It also included provisions allowing further geographic expansion. As of 2026, the International Accord remains active. It is considered the most rigorous supply chain safety mechanism in the global garment industry.

How Has Supply Chain Law Changed in the EU, UK, Germany, and Canada Since 2013?

Rana Plaza did not immediately produce legislation. That took a decade of advocacy, the growth of ESG frameworks, and escalating climate and human rights crises. But it fundamentally reshaped the political and moral environment in which that legislation eventually passed.

In Germany, the Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz (Supply Chain Due Diligence Act, LkSG) entered into force in January 2023. This act requires companies with more than 1,000 employees to conduct risk assessments across their supply chains. It also mandates remediation for human rights and environmental violations. Rana Plaza-type situations, in which known structural safety risks are ignored in brand-supplier relationships, fall squarely within its scope.

At EU level, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), adopted in 2024, imposes mandatory due diligence obligations. These obligations span value chains for large EU companies. They also apply to non-EU companies operating in the EU single market. The fashion and textile sector is explicitly mentioned in implementation guidance. Our post on ESG compliance requirements in 2026 covers the full enforcement timeline.

In the UK, the Modern Slavery Act 2015 requires large companies to publish annual supply chain transparency statements. Critics have long argued the Act lacks enforcement teeth, and parliamentary pressure for a stronger version has grown. In Canada, Bill S-211 came into force in January 2024. This is the Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act. It requires annual reporting from large private sector entities. These reports must detail steps taken to prevent forced labour in supply chains.

In the United States, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) became effective in 2022. It created a rebuttable presumption that goods from Xinjiang are the product of forced labour. This has significant implications for apparel brands sourcing cotton and textiles.

What Still Has Not Changed Since Rana Plaza?

Bangladesh’s garment industry employs approximately 4 million workers, the vast majority of them women. The country remains the world’s second-largest apparel exporter. Worker safety has improved in International Accord-covered factories. But wages remain among the lowest in any major garment-producing country. Workers who organise, strike, or demand higher pay still face termination, harassment, and in some documented cases, violence.

The structural economics that made Rana Plaza possible have not been fundamentally dismantled. These include a race to the bottom on price and extreme purchasing power asymmetry between international brands and supplier factories. They also involve the use of audit systems to manage reputational risk rather than genuine worker welfare. The International Accord and mandatory due diligence laws are meaningful steps. They are not solutions to a problem that ultimately requires living wages, freely exercised freedom of association, and enforceable worker rights at factory level.

For organisations working on ESG reporting and supply chain sustainability in 2026, Rana Plaza remains the clearest demonstration of why disclosure without accountability produces tragedies, and why the transition from voluntary to mandatory due diligence was not a bureaucratic exercise but a moral necessity.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many people died in the Rana Plaza collapse?

1,134 workers were killed and over 2,500 were injured. It is the deadliest accident in the history of the global garment industry.

Which brands were linked to Rana Plaza?

Brands that had clothes made in Rana Plaza factories include Primark, Inditex (Zara), Mango, Walmart, Joe Fresh (Loblaw), Bonmarche, and Matalan. Some were linked through subcontracting arrangements that were not obvious in their supplier lists.

What is the International Accord?

The International Accord for Health and Safety in the Textile and Garment Industry is a legally binding agreement between global brands and trade unions that requires independent factory safety inspections, funded remediation, and contractual accountability. It evolved from the 2013 Bangladesh Accord and is now active in both Bangladesh and Pakistan.

What laws were passed because of Rana Plaza?

No single law was passed solely because of Rana Plaza, but the disaster materially shaped mandatory supply chain due diligence legislation. Key laws include Germany’s LkSG (2023), the EU’s CSDDD (2024), Canada’s Bill S-211 (2024), and the UK Modern Slavery Act (2015) with ongoing strengthening debates.

Was Sohel Rana convicted?

Sohel Rana was convicted on charges related to concealing assets. A murder trial involving him and 37 other accused has proceeded slowly through the Bangladeshi court system. A final murder verdict had not been delivered as of recent reporting, more than a decade after the collapse.

Are garment workers in Bangladesh safer today than in 2013?

In International Accord-covered factories, structural and fire safety has measurably improved. However, wages remain very low, freedom of association faces ongoing restrictions, and factories outside the Accord’s coverage operate with less oversight. Systemic change in purchasing practices and worker rights has been partial at best.