DHAKA, Bangladesh — Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal Monday sentenced ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to death in absentia in Dhaka for ordering a deadly crackdown on last year’s student-led uprising. The Sheikh Hasina death sentence has prompted the interim government to formally ask India to extradite her from exile in New Delhi under a bilateral treaty, Nov. 17, 2025.
Sheikh Hasina’s death sentence deepens rift with India.
The tribunal found Hasina, 78, guilty on multiple counts of crimes against humanity linked to security forces firing on largely unarmed student protesters in mid-2024, a crackdown the United Nations says left up to 1,400 people dead and thousands wounded. In the same case, former Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan also received a death sentence. In contrast, former police chief Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun was given a reduced prison term for cooperating with prosecutors.
After the verdict, Bangladesh’s Foreign Ministry sent a formal note to New Delhi insisting that, under the countries’ extradition treaty, returning Hasina and Khan is a “binding obligation” and warning that continued refusal would be “a highly unfriendly act and a disregard for justice.” India has replied that it has “noted” the judgment and will engage “constructively.” Still, officials say any extradition would require a lengthy legal review of the tribunal’s procedures, mainly because the case can be framed as political under treaty exceptions.
In a detailed account of the ruling, Reuters reported that crowds of victims’ families applauded inside the Dhaka courtroom as the judgment was read. At the same time, Hasina, speaking from exile, denounced the tribunal as biased and “rigged.” The interim government of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus has hailed the Sheikh Hasina death sentence as a historic step toward accountability, but urged supporters to avoid street violence ahead of elections expected in February.
From quota protests to crimes against humanity charges
The path to the Sheikh Hasina death sentence began with university protests in mid-2024 over government job quotas, which quickly spiraled into a nationwide revolt demanding Hasina’s resignation. Early coverage from August 2024 described student groups under the banner Students Against Discrimination clashing with police and ruling party activists amid rising anger over unemployment and alleged excessive force by security agencies. Reuters reported at the time that dozens were killed in a single day as demonstrators shifted from quota reform to a singular demand: Hasina must go.
By Dec. 31, 2024, thousands of Bangladeshis were marching at a “March for Unity” rally in Dhaka to commemorate what many now call the July Uprising and to remember more than 1,000 people killed in the unrest. Another Reuters dispatch noted that protesters chanted slogans against Hasina as they marked five months since she fled to India. An interim administration — including representatives of the student movement — took office.
The International Crimes Tribunal, a domestic war-crimes court originally set up by Hasina’s own government in 2010, later charged her with incitement, ordering killings, and failing to prevent atrocities during the 2024 uprising. Prosecutors relied on testimony from victims, forensic analysis, and leaked audio recordings in which Hasina allegedly endorsed using lethal force, according to Human Rights Watch.
India weighs treaty obligations, politics, and the death penalty.
India has hosted Hasina since Aug. 5, 2024, when she left Dhaka just before protesters stormed her official residence. For New Delhi, the Sheikh Hasina death sentence poses a strategic dilemma: honoring its long relationship with a former ally while trying to reset ties with a new Bangladeshi leadership that has moved closer to Pakistan and voiced resentment over India’s past support for Hasina.
A detailed analysis in Al Jazeera noted that India’s extradition treaty with Bangladesh includes an exception for offenses deemed “of a political character,” a clause analysts say New Delhi is likely to invoke. Diplomats and scholars quoted in that report argue that handing Hasina over to face execution would alienate pro-India constituencies in Bangladesh and signal that New Delhi abandons its allies once they fall from power.
At the same time, Indian officials have privately stressed that any extradition decision must consider whether the tribunal met fair-trial standards and whether the death penalty would make removal an act tantamount to facilitating an execution. That concern echoes warnings from Human Rights Watch, which says trials in absentia and capital punishment in this case “raise serious human rights concerns” and calls for a moratorium on executions.
Fair-trial concerns and what comes next
Supporters of the Sheikh Hasina death sentence, including families of slain protesters, say anything less than capital punishment would fail to match the scale of abuses under her rule and the bloodshed of 2024. Her Awami League allies and some international legal experts counter that the tribunal has a history of politicization, and that conducting the most serious trial in Bangladesh’s history without the defendant present or represented by counsel of her choosing undermines its legitimacy.
For now, Hasina remains in New Delhi, far from the gallows, as Bangladesh’s interim authorities, rights groups, and foreign capitals all try to shape what the verdict will mean in practice. Whether India ultimately extradites her or refuses and absorbs the diplomatic fallout, the Sheikh Hasina death sentence has already become a test of how South Asia balances demands for accountability, the politics of asylum, and long-standing opposition to the death penalty.
