A five-member review committee formed by Bangladesh’s Ministry of Education recommended removing “Sharifa’s Story” from the seventh-grade History and Social Science textbook, according to reports published on 16 May 2024. The story, included in the chapter Similarities and Differences Between People, introduced students to the experiences of a Hijra person and addressed issues of gender identity, social acceptance and discrimination. The committee reportedly submitted its findings to the Ministry of Education during the first week of May, recommending the complete removal of the story rather than revisions to its content. According to an unnamed committee member quoted by The Daily Star, the recommendation was based on various alleged errors and inconsistencies in the story. The final decision on whether to remove the material remained with the Ministry of Education.

The recommendation followed months of religious and conservative opposition to the inclusion of Hijra and transgender-related content in Bangladesh’s national curriculum. The controversy intensified on 19 January 2024, when BRAC University part-time lecturer Asif Mahtab Utsha publicly tore pages containing “Sharifa’s Story” during a seminar, accusing the textbook of promoting transgender identities. Following protests and demands for the story’s removal, the Ministry of Education established the review committee on 24 January. The committee was chaired by Professor Abdur Rashid, Vice-Chancellor of Islamic Arabic University, and included Mufti Maulana Kafil Uddin Sarker, Governor of the Islamic Foundation; Professor Mohammad Moshiuzzaman, a member of the National Curriculum and Textbook Board (NCTB); Professor Abdul Halim, Director of the Institute of Education and Research at the University of Dhaka; and Professor Mohammad Abdur Rashid, Principal of Dhaka Alia Madrasa. Three of the five members were associated with religious or Islamic educational institutions.

Despite reviewing educational material specifically addressing the experiences and identities of Hijra people, the committee did not include any representatives of Hijra or transgender communities. Nor did its membership include representatives of civil society or development organisations with longstanding experience working on gender diversity and the rights of these communities, or medical professionals specialising in gender-related issues. The committee's composition had already attracted criticism from academics and human rights activists, who questioned the inclusion of religious representatives in the review of educational content concerning gender identity. Its recommendation to remove the story marked a significant development in the campaign against Hijra and transgender representation in school education, as demands previously advanced through religious campaigns, public demonstrations and legal notices were reflected in the findings of a government-appointed review body.