Bangladesh is entering a fraught new political chapter. On 17 November 2025, the country’s International Crimes Tribunal (ICT‑1) pronounced a death sentence on former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, convicting her in absentia of crimes against humanity tied to a brutal crackdown on student-led protests in 2024. This verdict has stirred global debate — hailed by some as historical accountability, criticized by others as politically driven retribution. The stakes are high: for justice, for democracy, and for the future of Bangladesh.
The Story So Far: From Protests to Tribunal
The 2024 Uprising
The crisis traces its roots to a large-scale student protest that erupted in July 2024. Students took to the streets to oppose the reinstatement of a civil service quota system they saw as favoring the children of ruling elites. The demonstrations quickly grew into a broader revolt against what many saw as entrenched privilege, corruption, and political stagnation.
The government’s response was severe. According to the tribunal’s case, security forces deployed advanced hardware — drones, helicopters, and lethal weapons — to suppress the crowds. Reports indicate that hundreds, possibly over a thousand, were killed. The tribunal later cited “superior responsibility,” claiming Hasina ordered or at least sanctioned this use of force.
Amid the chaos, Hasina fled Bangladesh and went into exile in neighboring India, underlining the gravity of the political breakdown. Her absence would become a key feature of her trial.
The Tribunal Moves
Shortly after her departure, Bangladesh’s interim government, headed by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, reactivated the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT-1) with a renewed mandate. On 10 July 2025, Hasina was formally indicted along with former home minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal and ex-IGP Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun on multiple counts, including incitement, complicity in mass killings, and failure to prevent atrocities.
Trial opened on 3 August 2025, with the court bringing in witnesses who had been on the ground during the protests. The prosecution presented 54 of its 81 witnesses. Notably, Al-Mamun — once a top police official — turned state witness, admitting wrongdoing.
What the Tribunal Ruled
On verdict day, the tribunal found Hasina guilty on several major counts. Key findings included:
-
She allegedly ordered the use of lethal force, including helicopters and drones, against protesters.
-
She incited violence through her party, allegedly encouraging the suppression of dissent.
-
The tribunal also found fault in her failure to prevent killings and other atrocities — a charge of “command responsibility.”
On three of these counts, she was awarded the death sentence. On additional charges, she received a sentence of life imprisonment.
Alongside her, former Home Minister Khan was also sentenced to death. Al-Mamun, because of his cooperation, was given just five years’ imprisonment. The tribunal also directed that the state pay compensation to victims and the families of those killed.
Why This Verdict Matters
Accountability — Or a Politically Motivated Trial?
At first glance, the sentencing appears to fulfill a long-standing demand: that leaders be held accountable for state violence. For the families of protestors, it may feel like justice finally arrived after a brutal crackdown.
Yet, the political dimensions are undeniable. This trial was initiated under an interim government — not one elected by popular vote. Critics, including Hasina and her supporters, argue the tribunal is less about seeking justice than purging a political rival ahead of looming elections. Hasina called the verdict “biased” and labeled the tribunal a “rigged court” presided over by a government without democratic legitimacy.
International Norms and Human Rights Concerns
Human Rights Watch (HRW) and other rights organizations have raised red flags. HRW’s Asia deputy director Meenakshi Ganguly remarked that while there’s “enduring anger and anguish” in Bangladesh over Hasina’s rule, the “trial must meet international fair-trial standards.”
Amnesty International went further, condemning the death penalty itself. Its Secretary-General, Agnès Callamard, argued that the sentence “simply compounds human rights violations” and called for a truly impartial process for victims.
The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) also expressed concern, particularly about Hasina being tried in absentia. Its spokesperson, Ravina Shamdasani, said such proceedings must “unquestionably meet international standards of due process.”
Historical & Structural Underpinnings
Hasina’s Political Legacy
Sheikh Hasina is a towering figure in Bangladesh’s post-independence history. As the daughter of Bangladesh’s founding leader, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, she led the country for more than a decade, overseeing significant economic growth and development. But her time in power was not without controversy — criticism of institutional consolidation, suppression of political opposition, and control over the press was widespread.
Ironically, the tribunal that convicted her was set up by her own administration back in 2010 to try 1971 war criminals. Over time, the tribunal itself has become laced with political tension — used, some allege, as a legal tool for settling scores.
The Power Shift of 2024
The 2024 uprising was not just a protest — it was a rupture. Young Bangladeshis, long dissatisfied with economic inequality, corruption, and entrenched elite privilege, took center stage. Their energy threatened not just specific policies but the broader rule structure.
When Hasina fled and the interim government took over, it was more than a change of leadership — it was a structural reset. The tribunal’s reactivation under Yunus’ administration indicates that the new regime seeks not just to govern, but to reshape the political narrative and accountability architecture.
Critical Risks and Strategic Concerns
Internal Polarization and Instability
This verdict may deepen divisions in Bangladesh. Hasina has a powerful support base. For many of her loyalists, the trial will reinforce their narrative of persecution. Protests, violence, or political unrest may follow, especially given her absence and the high emotional stakes.
Legitimacy of the Tribunal
If the trial is perceived as politically motivated, it could delegitimize not only this verdict but future accountability efforts. A tribunal viewed as a justice mechanism risks becoming a tool for political purges.
International Backlash
The use of capital punishment is contentious. Global human rights actors may continue to pressure Dhaka, potentially straining diplomatic relations and affecting foreign aid, investment, and international cooperation.
Precedent for Domestic Political Trials
Perhaps most perilously, this verdict can set a precedent. Using a tribunal for crimes against humanity to prosecute contemporary political leaders could blur the line between justice and political vendetta. The recent expansion of the tribunal’s mandate to prosecute entire political parties underscores that risk.
Geopolitical Implications
Dealing with India
Hasina currently resides in India, which complicates any potential extradition request. Dhaka’s interim regime may push for her handover, but New Delhi must weigh political, diplomatic, and domestic implications — especially ahead of potential elections.
Regional Stability
Bangladesh’s future stability now hangs in the balance. If unrest follows the verdict, it could affect not just domestic governance but regional dynamics in South Asia. Bangladesh is strategically important — politically, economically, and geostrategically.
Messaging to the World
Dhaka is also sending signals internationally: that it is capable of prosecuting leaders, even powerful ones; that it is serious about accountability. But whether this action is viewed globally as legitimate justice or a partisan purge will depend on how the process unfolds now — and in the months ahead.
What Comes Next — Scenarios and Forecasts
-
Stabilization Through Justice
-
Hasina surrenders or is extradited → appeals → a full appellate process could solidify institutional legitimacy.
-
The tribunal builds a broader transitional justice framework, strengthening public trust.
-
The interim government uses the verdict to push forward democratic reforms and reconciliation.
-
-
Polarization and Backlash
-
Mass protests, especially from Awami League loyalists, could erupt.
-
The trial’s legitimacy is challenged, weakening the tribunal’s authority.
-
International actors call for a retrial or review; diplomatic tensions escalate.
-
-
Compromised Outcome
-
Negotiated political settlement: Hasina might return under conditions, or a deal brokered to reduce her sentence.
-
Partial accountability: Some leaders face trial, others are pardoned or excluded.
-
Elections proceed, but trust in justice institutions remains fractured.
-
Sheikh Hasina’s sentencing to death is a seismic moment in Bangladesh’s political history. It is not just a legal judgment — it is a symbol of power, reckoning, and risk. Whether this verdict marks the dawn of genuine accountability or a misstep in political retribution will depend on what happens next.
To strengthen democracy, Bangladesh needs more than a dramatic verdict. It needs transparent, fair, and institutionally sound processes. It needs a judiciary that can hold leaders to account without becoming a tool of political conflict. And it needs to ensure that justice is not just done, but is seen to be done — in a way that unites rather than divides.
For the world watching, Bangladesh’s trial of Hasina is more than a national story. It is a test of how emerging democracies can navigate the fine line between accountability and vendetta, and how they can build a future that respects both justice and political stability.
Related stories:
Ex-Bangladesh General Accuses Sheikh Hasina of State Killings and Disappearances
In Bangladesh $16b Laundered Annually Under Ex-PM Hasina’s Rule, White Paper Report
Ex-Bangladesh Premier Sheikh Hasina Faces ICC Case for Alleged Crimes Against Humanity
