Former Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was found guilty of crimes against humanity by a special court in Dhaka and sentenced to death. Hasina, who lives in exile in India, was tried in absentia on several charges related to the Indian government’s deadly crackdown on student protests in 2024.
The prosecution of Hasina was a key promise made by the interim government led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus.
Read more about Monday’s ruling and what’s next.
What was the verdict?
The Special International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) in Dhaka found Hasina guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced her to death.
The independent ICT was originally founded by Hasina herself in 2010 to investigate crimes against humanity committed during the 1971 war that led to Bangladesh’s independence from Pakistan. However, it has been criticized in the past by human rights groups and her opponents for using it for politically motivated purposes while she was in power.
In particular, Hasina was found guilty and sentenced to death for ordering the deployment of drones, helicopters, and deadly weapons against protesters, and for killing protesters in Chankalpur, Dhaka, and Ashuria, Savar province “on her orders.” Twelve protesters were killed in these two areas.
“Accused Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina committed a crime against humanity by ordering incitement and also failed to take preventive and punitive measures based on count 1,” the judgment said.
“Defendant Sheikh Hasina committed one count of crime against humanity by ordering the use of drones, helicopters and deadly weapons in charge number 2,” the court said.
The court also handed down separate sentences up to the death penalty for three other charges: inciting protesters, issuing orders to kill, and failing to prevent atrocities and take punitive measures against perpetrators.
Former interior minister Asaduzzaman Khan, who was on trial alongside Hasina, was also sentenced to death. Former police chief Chaudhry Abdullah al-Mamun, who was also charged, was sentenced to five years in prison.
Mr. Al-Mamun showed leniency by cooperating with court proceedings. He “provided the court with important evidence to reach the correct sentence,” the court said.
Mr. Hasina and Mr. Khan are also believed to be in India, but their whereabouts are unknown, and the trial was held in absentia, while Mr. al-Mamun attended the court.
The court added: “The government is directed to pay significant compensation to the protesters involved in this case who died during the July 2024 Movement, and to take steps to pay adequate compensation to the injured protesters, taking into account the gravity of their injuries and losses.” However, it is unclear who will pay this compensation.
The judgment can be appealed to the Supreme Court.
Will Hasina and Khan be extradited to Bangladesh?
It is unclear whether Hasina and Khan will be extradited to Bangladesh to stand trial.
Bangladesh and India signed an extradition treaty in 2013. However, the treaty states that “extradition may be refused if the crime requested is a crime of a political nature.”
India has close ties to Hasina and has not formally responded to Dhaka’s previous extradition requests.
Sreerada Dutta, a professor of South Asian studies at India’s Jindal Global University, told Al Jazeera that “India will not extradite her under any circumstances.” “We have seen over the past year and a half that India-Bangladesh relations are not at their best and are fragile on many occasions.”
But Ishrat Hossain, an international relations expert and associate at the German Institute for International and Area Studies, told Al Jazeera that the ruling will help Bangladesh reclaim Hasina and Khan.
“Politically and legally, this ruling strengthens Bangladesh’s efforts to force India to extradite Sheikh Hasina, who fled to India after the government collapsed,” he said. “This also shows that the transitional authorities intend to go beyond symbolic gestures and seek accountability. Socially, this is an important early step in recognizing the suffering of survivors and the families of those killed under Hasina’s watch, even if full justice is a distant prospect.”
“Bringing those responsible for the police-led brutality during the 2024 Bangladesh uprising, which killed nearly 1,400 people, into custody has become a core priority of the transitional government.”
How did Hasina react to the verdict?
Hasina called the verdict “politically motivated”, according to AFP news agency.
“The judgment announced against me was handed down by a fraudulent tribunal set up and presided over by an unelected government with no democratic authority. The judgment is biased and politically motivated,” the Indian-born woman said.
“I am not afraid to confront my accusers in a proper courtroom where the evidence can be weighed fairly.”
Who is Hasina?
Hasina, 78, is the daughter of former President Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the founding father of Bangladesh. After the 1971 war, Bangladesh declared independence and separated from Pakistan.
In 1975, Rahman was assassinated in a military coup, beginning an era of military and paramilitary rule.
Hasina led a pro-democracy movement in 1990 that ousted military junta Hussein Mohammad Ershad. Hasina came to power in 1996 as the leader of the now-banned Awami League. Founded in 1949, the Awami League is a center-left party rooted in Bengali nationalism and secularism. The party enjoys strong support from those who supported the 1971 war.
Her first term as prime minister ended in 2001 after her party lost the general election to Khaleda Zia’s Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). Hasina was re-elected as prime minister in 2009 and remained in office for 15 years until she was ousted by student protests in August 2024 and fled to India. Bangladesh has no constitutional term limits for the prime minister.
Since Hasina’s ouster, Bangladesh has been led by an interim government led by Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus. Elections for a new parliament are expected to take place in early 2026.
In May, the interim government revoked the Awami League’s registration and banned it from political activity, citing national security concerns and ongoing war crimes investigations into senior members.
Why was Hasina brought to court over the student movement?
On July 1, 2024, Bangladeshis, mainly students and other young people, took to the streets to protest a High Court decision to reinstate a policy that reserves one-third of civil service jobs for descendants of those who fought in the 1971 war.
By July 19, protests had intensified, communication networks were cut off, and the military was called in to crack down on demonstrators. Student protesters were also attacked by the Bangladesh Chhatra League, the student wing of the Awami League. Thousands of students clashed with armed police in Dhaka, leaving about 1,400 people dead, according to United Nations estimates.
The court heard sufficient evidence that Hasina’s forces were ordered to fire on unarmed protesters.
In its own investigation since then, Al Jazeera has also uncovered secret phone recordings in which Hasina “used deadly force” on students protesting government policies last year and “issued public orders” to shoot “wherever she was found.”
Who was in the courtroom?
The ICT had three members and was headed by Justice Golam Murtaza Mazumdar, a former district court judge.
In December, the Awami League criticized Mazumdar’s appointment as chairman of the tribunal in an
The other two members of the court were Mohitul Haq Enam Chaudhry and Shofiul Alam Mahmood.
Members of the party refer to it as a “kangaroo court,” even though it was founded by Hasina herself. This is a derogatory term referring to a court or tribunal that ignores accepted standards of law and justice and often produces predetermined or biased results.
Are courts fair?
In October 2024, ICT issued arrest warrants for Hasina and 45 other people, including former ministers.
ICT Chief Prosecutor Mohammad Tajul Islam told reporters in October 2024 that “the court… has ordered the arrest of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her court appearance on November 18.”
“Sheikh Hasina was at the helm of people who committed genocide, killings and crimes against humanity in July and August,” he added.
A state lawyer has been appointed to represent Hasina and two others during the trial.
In October 2024, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a letter to the transitional government calling on it to reform the International Crimes Law (Courts) to ensure fair and impartial judicial procedures.
The HRW statement said the court was “fraught with past violations of fair trial standards, including failure to gather evidence, lack of independence of judges, including collusion with prosecutors, tampering with witnesses, denial of the right to legitimate defense, enforced disappearance of relatives of defendants, and use of the death penalty.”
HRW called on the transitional government to seek to suspend and abolish the death penalty in line with international human rights standards, amend laws to protect the due process rights of defendants, and establish a Witness and Victim Protection Unit with sufficient resources to protect individuals and their families before, during, and after testifying.
How did the court proceed?
After Hasina and Khan failed to appear in court in November 2024, another arrest warrant was issued in June. The two were formally charged on July 10th. Al-Mamun pleaded guilty on the same day, agreed to become a state witness, and agreed to testify for the prosecution.
Testimony took place from August 3rd to October 8th, and closing arguments were concluded from October 12th to October 23rd.
The court examined a large body of evidence against Hasina. 14 documents containing approximately 10,000 pages of official reports, medical and postmortem records, ballistics data, flight records, and media footage. There are 93 documentary exhibits and 32 physical exhibits such as ammunition, clothing, audio recordings, and field reports. There was testimony from more than 80 witnesses, including survivors, doctors, organizers, and investigators, 54 of whom testified in court.
Security was stepped up in Dhaka ahead of Monday’s verdict, especially in the ICT and surrounding Supreme Court areas. Police and paramilitary forces, including Rapid Action Battalion, Bangladesh Border Guard Force, and army units, were deployed.
Before the verdict, “fire on target” orders were issued in Dhaka and other parts of Bangladesh against those involved in arson, attacks involving explosives or violence.
What happens next?
“This decision marks an important turning point in Bangladeshi politics and could lead to increased instability in the run-up to national elections in February 2026,” Hossain told Al Jazeera.
Hossain said that although Awami League is currently banned from participating in elections, the party has a large and deeply rooted activist base that is likely to be mobilized through potentially destructive and violent protests.
“Such a confrontation risks reproducing the same pattern of repression and deadly force by law enforcement that the transitional government is currently seeking to adjudicate.”
But importantly, the approximately 15 million Bangladeshis living abroad, many of whom took part in protests in solidarity with students in 2024, often at the risk of being imprisoned in their country of residence, were given the means to vote by post for the first time. Many analysts believe their votes could sway the election, as they currently make up about 10 percent of the U.S. electorate.
Hossain said it is likely to be unstable in the short term, but it is unclear what will happen in the long term.
“The short-term outlook is therefore uncertain. The long-term impact remains uncertain, including whether this will usher in a sustained shift towards accountability or entrench a new cycle of politicized justice, and will depend on how both state institutions and political parties respond in the coming months.”
