Lead
On 17 November 2025, Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal convicted ousted prime minister Sheikh Hasina of crimes against humanity for her role in the violent suppression of student protests last year and sentenced her to death. The ruling said Hasina incited and ordered security forces to use lethal force, a judgment delivered by a three-judge panel in Dhaka. The verdict comes after demonstrations that began over civil service job quotas escalated into nationwide unrest that the UN human rights office says may have killed up to 1,400 people and injured as many as 25,000. The decision has already stirred street violence, diplomatic tension with India over an outstanding extradition request, and fresh fears of political turmoil ahead of elections scheduled for February 2026.
Key Takeaways
- The International Crimes Tribunal (domestic court) handed a death sentence to Sheikh Hasina on 17 November 2025 following a conviction for crimes against humanity.
- The court found Hasina responsible for incitement and orders that led to alleged extrajudicial killings during the 2024–25 student protests; the prosecution presented five primary charges.
- The UN human rights office has estimated the government crackdown may have killed up to 1,400 people and injured up to 25,000; these figures were cited during the trial.
- Hasina has denied the charges and has been living in self-imposed exile in New Delhi since August 2024; Dhaka has formally requested her extradition from India.
- Security tightened in Dhaka before the verdict, with explosions from Molotov cocktails reported and riot deployments around key government sites.
- The Awami League remains banned from political activities while trials of party leaders proceed, and Hasina’s supporters have threatened to block or disrupt next year’s elections.
Background
The protests began as student-led demonstrations over perceived unfairness in civil service recruitment and expanded into a broader movement calling for political change. What started as campus protests turned into nationwide unrest after a government crackdown last year that rights monitors and the UN say was highly lethal. Sheikh Hasina, daughter of Bangladesh’s founding leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, dominated national politics for much of the 21st century, serving as prime minister from 2009 until her ouster in 2024.
Hasina’s long rule was marked by rapid economic growth alongside recurring accusations from rights groups of democratic backsliding, media restrictions, and political intimidation. The 2024–25 unrest represented a rare mass overturning of her authority, culminating in her decision to leave Bangladesh and base herself in New Delhi in August 2024. The interim government, led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, has framed the post-Hasina prosecutions as part of restoring accountability and rebuilding trust in state institutions.
Main Event
On 17 November 2025, a three-judge panel of the International Crimes Tribunal read its verdict in a packed courtroom in Dhaka, where family members of victims were present. Judges said the evidence established that Hasina incited agents and failed to discipline or prevent the use of lethal force, and they concluded this met the legal standard for crimes against humanity. The court listed five charges, primarily alleging she ordered killings, authorized hangings of protesters, and directed use of lethal weapons including drones and helicopters to suppress demonstrations.
Hasina was not present in court; she has consistently denied wrongdoing and her lawyers argued the trial lacked basic fair-trial guarantees, lodging an appeal to the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. The interim government has formally asked New Delhi to extradite her, but Indian authorities have not publicly responded to the request as of the verdict date.
The announcement ignited unrest in Dhaka: security forces reported several Molotov cocktails detonated in the capital the day before the verdict, and police staged fortified deployments around the courthouse and government buildings. Hasina’s supporters have also signaled they will contest any election held without the Awami League participating, raising the prospect of mass demonstrations or disruptive tactics ahead of the February 2026 vote.
Analysis & Implications
Legally, the tribunal’s ruling marks a decisive use of domestic transitional justice mechanisms to hold a former head of government accountable for actions linked to large-scale repression. If upheld on appeal, the sentence will set a domestic precedent for treating political leaders’ orders and rhetoric as potentially criminal when tied to mass violence. That raises complex questions about separation of powers, evidentiary thresholds for command responsibility, and the safeguards needed for fair process in politically charged cases.
Politically, the verdict risks deepening polarization. The Awami League’s ban and the removal in 2024 of an entrenched leader have already reshaped Bangladesh’s party system; a capital sentence could further marginalize her base or, conversely, spur a militant backlash. Internationally, the ruling places pressure on regional diplomacy: New Delhi’s response to the extradition request will influence bilateral ties and could affect aid, trade or security cooperation with Dhaka.
From a governance and stability perspective, the immediate concern is the run-up to the February 2026 national elections. Large-scale protests, boycotts or violent confrontations would threaten the credibility and logistical feasibility of a free vote. Donors and multilateral institutions will face a choice between engagement to support democratic processes and restraint to avoid appearing to endorse contested domestic legal outcomes.
Comparison & Data
| Metric | 2024–25 Student Unrest (Court/UN cited) | Tribunal Allegations |
|---|---|---|
| Estimated deaths | Up to 1,400 (UN human rights office) | Alleged mass extrajudicial killings |
| Estimated injuries | Up to 25,000 (court testimony) | Widespread use of lethal force |
| Charges against Hasina | — | Five counts including incitement and ordering killings |
The figures above come from UN estimates cited during the trial and court records listing the prosecution’s case. They provide a scale for the state response that the tribunal evaluated; independent verification of every allegation remains part of ongoing appeals and inquiries.
Reactions & Quotes
The courtroom reaction was immediate and emotional: some victims’ relatives applauded when the sentence was announced, underscoring the depth of grievance among those who say they lost family members in the crackdown.
“Sheikh Hasina committed crimes against humanity by her incitement, order and failure to take punitive measures.”
International Crimes Tribunal, Bangladesh (judicial statement)
Hasina’s camp has decried the process as politically motivated and raised due-process concerns to international human-rights mechanisms. The interim government defended the proceedings as necessary for justice and institutional repair.
“We will not allow elections without the Awami League to go ahead… Our protests are going to get stronger and we will do whatever it takes.”
Sheikh Hasina’s son (statement reported to Reuters)
“These trials are an essential step toward restoring accountability and rebuilding public trust in democratic institutions.”
Interim government / Muhammad Yunus (official comment)
Unconfirmed
- Precise casualty tallies remain provisional: the UN estimate of up to 1,400 deaths has not been independently verified in every case and may be revised as investigations continue.
- The full text of the tribunal’s evidentiary record has not been publicly released in a single consolidated document, leaving some claims and links between orders and specific incidents subject to further scrutiny.
- The timing and outcome of any extradition request to India are uncertain; New Delhi had not publicly agreed to transfer Hasina as of the verdict date.
Bottom Line
The tribunal’s conviction and death sentence for Sheikh Hasina represent a major turning point in Bangladesh’s political transition after the 2024–25 protests. The ruling responds to alleged mass abuses but also magnifies political fault lines that could destabilize the country ahead of the February 2026 election. Domestic actors, regional governments and multilateral institutions now face choices about engagement, mediation and how to support credible electoral processes while respecting Bangladesh’s legal sovereignty.
Key near-term indicators to watch are India’s response to the extradition request, the interim government’s management of security and electoral preparations, and the Awami League’s tactical decisions about contesting or disrupting the vote. Independent verification of casualty figures and transparent appeals will be central to international assessments of whether justice, not retribution, is being served.
Sources
- CNN — news report (original article)
- UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR) — official human-rights monitoring and estimates
- Reuters — international news reporting on reactions and statements
- International Crimes Tribunal (Bangladesh) — overview (encyclopedic reference)