In a dramatic turn of events with significant diplomatic implications, Bangladesh’s foreign ministry on Monday formally requested India to hand over former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina following a death sentence issued against her by the International Crimes Tribunal of Bangladesh (ICT-BD). The tribunal found Hasina guilty on multiple charges, including incitement, ordering killings, and failing to prevent atrocities during a violent crackdown on student protests last year that ultimately led to her ouster. The request has placed India in a delicate position, balancing legal, diplomatic, and humanitarian considerations while continuing to maintain close bilateral ties with its eastern neighbor.

According to the official statement issued by the Bangladesh foreign ministry, the request was framed in the context of a bilateral extradition agreement between India and Bangladesh. The ministry emphasized that it is India’s “obligatory responsibility” to ensure the return of Hasina, whom it termed a “fugitive accused,” to face the consequences of the tribunal’s verdict. The statement underscored that providing refuge to individuals convicted of crimes against humanity would constitute a “highly unfriendly act” and reflect disregard for justice. The ministry further urged New Delhi to act swiftly and in accordance with international norms and the obligations outlined in the bilateral extradition treaty.

The ICT-BD, which conducted the trial, issued the death sentence after concluding that Hasina had a direct and significant role in a crackdown on student protesters in July of the previous year. The tribunal’s verdict held her accountable for inciting violence, ordering targeted killings, and failing to take necessary steps to prevent atrocities against unarmed civilians. The tribunal also found former interior minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal guilty on multiple counts, sentencing him to death in absentia. In addition, former Inspector General of Police Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun was convicted for committing crimes against humanity during the same period. The tribunal’s findings and sentencing have not only triggered political upheaval within Bangladesh but have also reverberated across the region, drawing international attention to the legal and political ramifications of the case.

Sheikh Hasina’s current circumstances have compounded the situation. Following her ouster amid a mass student-led uprising against her administration, Hasina sought refuge in India, reportedly residing in a secret safe house in Delhi. According to her son, Sajeeb Wazed, India has been providing full security to the former prime minister since her arrival. Hasina herself expressed gratitude for India’s protection, acknowledging the safe haven provided over the past year. This period of self-exile has allowed her to avoid returning to Bangladesh to attend the tribunal proceedings, which she has consistently described as politically motivated and lacking in legitimacy.

In a strongly worded statement reacting to the death sentence, Hasina rejected all charges leveled against her, describing the tribunal as “rigged” and alleging that it operates under the control of an unelected government with no democratic mandate. She asserted that the verdict was politically motivated and aimed at neutralizing the Awami League as a political force in Bangladesh. Hasina highlighted the extreme nature of the tribunal’s actions, characterizing the call for a death sentence as reflective of “brazen and murderous intent” by interim government actors seeking to eliminate opposition leadership and suppress democratic processes. Her statement reiterated her stance that the tribunal’s findings were based on flawed procedures and politically influenced evidence, and she maintained her innocence in the face of charges that carry the gravest of penalties.

The backdrop of Sheikh Hasina’s ouster is crucial to understanding the present tensions. Her government faced widespread protests and civil unrest in July of the previous year when students and activists mobilized against perceived authoritarian measures and failures in governance. The protests escalated into violent confrontations, leading to a heavy-handed response by security forces. The tribunal’s investigation centered on these events, holding Hasina and several top officials accountable for the use of force and for allegedly failing to prevent civilian casualties. The political fallout from the uprising culminated in Hasina’s removal from office in August, leading to her decision to seek asylum in India amid fears of persecution and potential imprisonment.

Bangladesh’s formal request to India introduces a complex set of diplomatic, legal, and humanitarian considerations. India, as a close neighbor with longstanding political, economic, and cultural ties with Bangladesh, faces the challenge of navigating its obligations under bilateral agreements while also respecting the personal safety and human rights of a former head of state. Extradition of a political figure, particularly one accused of crimes that carry the death penalty, carries potential ramifications for regional stability, international relations, and domestic political considerations in India.

The request also comes at a politically sensitive juncture in Bangladesh. The tribunal’s verdict and the sentencing of Hasina precede the country’s first national election since her ouster, scheduled for February 2026. Analysts note that the handling of Hasina’s status—whether she is allowed to remain in India or returned to Bangladesh to face execution—could significantly influence electoral dynamics, public sentiment, and the overall political climate. The ruling party, opposition groups, and international observers are closely monitoring developments, recognizing that any move could have far-reaching consequences for governance, democratic norms, and regional diplomacy.

While Bangladesh has formally requested Hasina’s extradition, there is no indication that India has made a public response to date. Observers note that India is likely to weigh multiple factors, including the legal obligations under the extradition treaty, the legitimacy of the tribunal proceedings as perceived internationally, humanitarian considerations, and the broader geopolitical context. Additionally, international human rights organizations and legal experts may scrutinize any attempt to extradite a former prime minister facing the death penalty, emphasizing the importance of due process, fair trial standards, and adherence to international human rights norms.

The situation is further complicated by Sheikh Hasina’s assertions that the tribunal lacks democratic legitimacy and is politically biased. By framing the proceedings as an effort to marginalize her party and suppress opposition, Hasina has drawn attention to the potential politicization of judicial mechanisms in post-ouster Bangladesh. These claims, coupled with the request from Bangladesh’s government, create a scenario in which India must carefully balance diplomatic pressure, regional stability, and adherence to legal and ethical standards in international law.

In conclusion, Bangladesh’s formal appeal for India to hand over Sheikh Hasina following her death sentence by the International Crimes Tribunal has set the stage for a high-stakes diplomatic and legal confrontation. The case raises profound questions about accountability, political legitimacy, and the responsibilities of nations to comply with bilateral treaties while safeguarding human rights. As Hasina remains under Indian protection in a secret location, the eyes of regional leaders, international legal observers, and the global community remain firmly fixed on Delhi. The outcome of this situation will not only impact India-Bangladesh relations but may also set precedents for handling cases involving former heads of state, international extradition obligations, and the protection of political figures facing politically sensitive legal proceedings.

The coming weeks are expected to be pivotal, as both countries navigate the complexities of law, diplomacy, and politics. India’s decision will likely influence the trajectory of Bangladesh’s political future, the credibility of its judicial processes, and the regional perception of justice, human rights, and bilateral cooperation in South Asia.