On November 17, 2025, the International Crimes Tribunal in Dhaka handed down death sentences to former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and former Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal for crimes against humanity committed during the violent suppression of student-led protests in July and August 2024. The verdict, delivered in absentia, came after both fled to India following the uprising that toppled Hasina’s 15-year rule. The protests, which began over a controversial 30% government job quota for children of freedom fighters, spiraled into nationwide unrest after security forces opened fire on unarmed demonstrators. By the time it ended, nearly 1,400 people — including children and university students — were dead, and over 10,000 injured, according to a United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) report.
The Spark That Ignited a Nation
The unrest didn’t start with calls for revolution. It began with students at Dhaka University and Rajshahi University demanding the repeal of a quota system they saw as political patronage. The policy, reinstated by Hasina’s government in June 2024, reserved 30% of civil service positions for descendants of those who fought in Bangladesh’s 1971 independence war — a group overwhelmingly aligned with the ruling Awami League. But when police blocked peaceful marches with batons and tear gas, and later used live ammunition, the movement exploded. Videos of students being shot in the head while kneeling went viral. By mid-July, millions were in the streets. The government’s response? More force. Drones dropped tear gas canisters on university campuses. Helicopters hovered over protest sites, firing indiscriminately.
“It wasn’t just repression,” said one medical volunteer who treated over 200 wounded at a makeshift clinic in Chittagong. “It was eradication. They didn’t want protesters — they wanted to erase them.”
The Trial: Justice or Revenge?
The tribunal’s proceedings, which began in June 2025, were swift. Prosecutors presented over 400 witness statements, drone footage, and internal communications showing Hasina personally authorizing “maximum force” against “anti-state elements.” Asaduzzaman Khan, as Home Minister, was found to have signed off on deployment orders that bypassed standard protocols for crowd control. The court also convicted two senior police officers and a military liaison for direct involvement in three extrajudicial killings.
But the trial’s fairness is in question. Human Rights Watch documented that Hasina and Khan were denied access to their legal team for over six weeks before the trial. No defense witnesses were allowed. Evidence was admitted without cross-examination. “This wasn’t justice,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, HRW’s South Asia Director. “It was a verdict written before the hearing began.”
Amnesty International echoed that sentiment. “The death penalty is not justice,” said Secretary General Agnès Callamard. “It’s state-sanctioned vengeance. And it turns victims into martyrs for a system that now mirrors the brutality it claims to condemn.”
International Reaction: Caution Over Celebration
The United Nations stopped short of endorsing the verdict. Volker Türk, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, called the ruling “an important moment for victims,” but immediately added: “We oppose the death penalty in all circumstances.” He urged Bangladesh to pursue “truth-telling, reparation, and justice” — not punishment alone. The OHCHR’s February 2025 report had already concluded that the crackdown met the threshold of crimes against humanity under international law. But the tribunal’s process, Türk warned, risks deepening divisions.
India, where Hasina now lives under informal protection, has refused to comment on extradition. Diplomats say New Delhi sees the death sentence as a red line — one that would make any repatriation politically explosive. “Extraditing someone for execution? That’s not diplomacy,” said a senior Indian foreign ministry official on condition of anonymity. “It’s complicity.”
Who’s Left Standing?
Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun, the former police chief who turned state witness, was sentenced to five years — a deal that spared him the gallows. His testimony, which included recordings of Hasina ordering “no mercy,” was central to the prosecution. But critics argue his cooperation came too late, and his credibility is tainted by his own role in the violence.
Meanwhile, Bangladesh’s interim government — installed after Hasina’s resignation — faces its own crisis. With no clear constitutional successor, power rests with a military-backed caretaker cabinet. Protests have returned, this time demanding the dissolution of the tribunal and new elections. “We didn’t overthrow one dictator to install another court,” said 19-year-old activist Nusrat Jahan, who lost her brother in the August 2024 crackdown. “We want a system that doesn’t kill us for asking for rights.”
The Long Shadow of the Past
The International Crimes Tribunal was originally created in 2010 to prosecute war crimes from 1971. But over the years, it became a tool for political targeting — primarily against Islamist parties like Jamaat-e-Islami. “This tribunal has always been politicized,” said M. Osman Siddique, a Bangladesh analyst at the Atlantic Council. “Now it’s being used to settle scores with the old regime. That doesn’t heal a nation. It just rewrites the script.”
The death sentences have reignited debates about transitional justice. Should perpetrators be executed? Or should Bangladesh pursue truth commissions, like South Africa’s post-apartheid model? The UN’s call for “reparation” suggests the latter — but the tribunal’s verdict points to the former.
Frequently Asked Questions
How did the 2024 student protests start, and why did they turn violent?
The protests began in June 2024 after the government reinstated a 30% job quota for children of 1971 freedom fighters, which students saw as favoring Awami League loyalists. Peaceful demonstrations escalated after security forces used batons, tear gas, and live ammunition against unarmed crowds. Videos of children being shot on university campuses went viral, sparking nationwide outrage and demands for Hasina’s resignation.
Why are human rights groups criticizing the trial despite the gravity of the crimes?
Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International argue the trial violated international fair trial standards: defendants were denied legal access, witnesses weren’t cross-examined, and defense evidence was excluded. While accountability is essential, they say executing leaders without due process mirrors the very repression the tribunal claims to condemn — and undermines the legitimacy of justice itself.
What role did the UN play in uncovering the atrocities?
The UN’s OHCHR conducted an independent investigation in late 2024, gathering over 800 testimonies, drone footage, and internal government communications. Their February 2025 report confirmed systematic attacks on protesters, including targeted killings and use of military-grade weapons against civilians. The UN classified the actions as crimes against humanity — a finding that paved the way for the tribunal’s charges.
Will Sheikh Hasina be extradited from India?
India has not indicated any intention to extradite Hasina. Extradition treaties typically bar surrendering individuals to face the death penalty, and New Delhi views the tribunal’s verdict as politically motivated. With Bangladesh’s interim government lacking international recognition and India wary of regional instability, Hasina is expected to remain in exile indefinitely.
What happens now in Bangladesh?
Power rests with a military-backed caretaker government, but protests have reignited, this time demanding elections and the abolition of the tribunal. With no clear constitutional successor and deep public distrust in institutions, the country faces a dangerous power vacuum. Analysts warn that without inclusive dialogue and truth-telling, the cycle of repression may simply repeat under new leadership.
Is the death penalty legal in Bangladesh?
Yes, Bangladesh retains the death penalty for crimes including murder, terrorism, and crimes against humanity. Executions are rare — the last was in 2021 — but the country has one of the largest death row populations in South Asia. While the UN and human rights groups urge abolition, the government has shown no sign of changing course, even as international pressure mounts.
