Sheikh Hasina was sentenced to death in absentia by Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal over the violent suppression of 2024 student protests. Having fled to India in August, her fate now depends on whether New Delhi will extradite her, a move complicated by legal exceptions and political considerations. The verdict intensifies tensions ahead of February’s elections and deepens divisions within Bangladesh’s polarized political landscape.
Bangladesh Sentences Sheikh Hasina to Death in Absentia — India Holds the Key
Sheikh Hasina was sentenced to death in absentia by Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal over the violent suppression of 2024 student protests. Having fled to India in August, her fate now depends on whether New Delhi will extradite her, a move complicated by legal exceptions and political considerations. The verdict intensifies tensions ahead of February’s elections and deepens divisions within Bangladesh’s polarized political landscape.

Sheikh Hasina, Bangladesh’s former prime minister and the eldest daughter of the nation’s founding leader, has been sentenced to death in absentia by Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal for her role in the violent suppression of the 2024 student protests. Having fled to India in August after months of unrest, her fate now hinges on whether New Delhi will extradite her to Dhaka.
Hasina rose to prominence after the 1975 assassination of her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, an event that propelled her into a lifetime of politics marked by exile, rivalry, and repeated returns to power. She led the Awami League and served multiple terms as prime minister, presiding over a period of strong economic growth but also mounting criticism from human rights groups and opposition figures about democratic backsliding and a heavy-handed approach to dissent.
The 2024 crisis began with student protests over civil service quotas and swelled into a nationwide movement demanding Hasina’s resignation. Authorities responded with a sweeping crackdown that, according to the UN human rights office, may have resulted in as many as 1,400 deaths. The government she led was ultimately toppled by the uprising and a transitional authority took over.
In its ruling, the tribunal — a domestic court that Hasina helped establish years earlier — concluded she ordered lethal force against demonstrators and incited violence, citing the use of weapons, drones and helicopters. The verdict was met with strong emotion from victims’ families, some of whom said the sentence offered partial solace. Hasina and her supporters deny the charges, calling the trial politically motivated.
Dhaka has formally demanded Hasina’s immediate extradition. New Delhi, however, has adopted a cautious public stance. India’s extradition law and its treaty with Bangladesh include a political-offence exception, which gives New Delhi legal grounds to refuse surrender if it judges the case to be political in nature. Indian officials and analysts have also noted outstanding legal appeals and argued that New Delhi can lawfully delay or decline action while those remedies are pursued.
“She had to flee the country to flee the rage of the people,” said political scientist Mubashar Hasan, capturing the sentiment of many critics who view Hasina’s flight as an admission of responsibility.
Supporters of Hasina — and members of her family who remain in India — have praised New Delhi for sheltering her. Observers note that Hasina had been one of India’s closest regional partners, cooperating on security and border issues that New Delhi regards as strategically important, particularly in the context of rivals such as Pakistan and China.
The timing of the sentence complicates Bangladesh’s political calendar. Parliamentary elections are scheduled for February, and the Awami League has been effectively sidelined: its leadership is dispersed and the party faces legal constraints. The interim government, led by a figure seen as neutral by some, faces the complex task of managing a polarized electorate and restoring public confidence in institutions ahead of the vote.
For India, the decision whether to hand Hasina over carries both legal and security implications. Officials worry that abrupt moves could destabilize an already fragile political environment or revive cross-border militant activity that Bangladesh and India have cooperated to suppress in recent years. For Bangladesh, the conviction is a test of domestic justice and political closure for victims’ families; for Hasina’s supporters it is a profound reversal in the career of an influential leader.
The case leaves open multiple possible outcomes: India could refuse extradition on political or legal grounds, delay action while appeals proceed, or — less likely, according to several analysts — comply with Dhaka’s request. Each path carries significant diplomatic consequences and will shape the region’s political dynamics in the months ahead.
Reporting contributions: Esha Mitra and Ayushi Shah.
