| Trial of Sheikh Hasina | |
|---|---|
 Verdict of the trial being telecast live at theTeacher-Student Centre, University of Dhaka. | |
| Court | International Crimes Tribunal-1 (Bangladesh) |
| Full case name | Chief Prosecutor vs. Sheikh Hasina & Others |
| Submitted | 1 June 2025 |
| Decided | 17 November 2025 |
| Verdict | Sheikh Hasina,Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal andChowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun guilty of crimes against humanity.
|
| Charge |
|
| Prosecution | Mohammad Tajul Islam (on behalf of the state) |
| Defense | Md Amir Hossain (on behalf of Sheikh Hasina and Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal,in absentia)
|
| Citation | ICT BD Case No. 02 of 2025 |
| Legislation cited | International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 [bn] |
| Case history | |
| Subsequent action | Separatecontempt of court conviction (2 July 2025): 6 months in prison.[1] |
| Court membership | |
| Chairman | Golam Mortuza Mozumder |
| Members |
|
TheChief Prosecutor vs. Sheikh Hasina & Others[2] was a case before theInternational Crimes Tribunal-I, Bangladesh, charging formerPrime MinisterSheikh Hasina, former Home MinisterAsaduzzaman Khan Kamal, and former Inspector General of Bangladesh PoliceChowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun withcrimes against humanity related to the government'sviolent suppression ofprotests in July and August 2024.[3][4] Hasina and Kamal, who were triedin absentia, were convicted on 17 November 2025 and sentenced to death. Mamun, who had been in police custody since September 2024, was also found guilty but received a five-year prison term after cooperating with investigators and serving as a state witness.[5]
The charges were formally submitted in June 2025 by the prosecution, led byMohammad Tajul Islam, while court-appointed attorney Amir Hossain represented the defendants triedin absentia. The proceedings were adjudicated by a three-judge panel of the tribunal. The charges stemmed from the state's response to the 2024 protests, which international observers and human rights organisations described as among the deadliest civilian crackdowns inBangladesh since independence.[6][7][8][9]
.jpg)
In mid‑2024, massdemonstrations led by university students demanding an end to the perceiveddiscriminatory quota in public jobs took place acrossBangladesh.[10] The protests intensified acrossDhaka and other major cities, and by late July, state security forces launched a violent crackdown under directives linked to Sheikh Hasina.[11] According to UN investigators, up to 1,400 civilians died during the crackdown, an action that the tribunal alleges Sheikh Hasina orchestrated as the "mastermind".[12][13]
On 5 August 2024, Sheikh Hasina wasousted from power and fled to India, triggering formal trial preparations.[14] Aninterim government led byMuhammad Yunus was formed on 8 August 2024.[15] On 14 October 2024, the interim government reconstituted the International Crimes Tribunal–1, appointing two judges of theHigh Court Division—Additional JudgeGolam Mortuza Mozumder as the chairman and JusticeMd. Shofiul Alam Mahmood, as a member, alongside retired district judge Mohitul Haque Enam Chowdhury.[16][17][18]
The Crimes Tribunal issued arrest warrants in early 2025 targeting Hasina and key former officials for crimes against humanity.[19] On 1 June 2025, the prosecution formally filed charges against Hasina, naming her as the principal accused in the tribunal.[20]
The trial officially began on 1 June 2025, when theInternational Crimes Tribunal (ICT) accepted theprosecution's framing of the case as a matter of "coordinated and systematic violence" against unarmed civilians.[21] The trial marked the first time aformer Bangladeshi prime minister was brought before the tribunal on charges ofcrimes against humanity. Proceedings were televised nationwide, a first in the country's legal history.[22] The prosecution alleged that theHasina government deployed conventional police and military units, as well as drones, helicopters, and incendiary weapons against demonstrators.[23]
The tribunal ruled that the trial would proceed in absentia forSheikh Hasina andAsaduzzaman Khan Kamal, both of whom had refused to return to Bangladesh despite formal summons and public notices.[24] On 19 June 2025, the tribunal appointed AY Moshiuzzaman, a senior jurist of theSupreme Court of Bangladesh, asamicus curiae in the case.[25] FormerIGP of Bangladesh,Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun, who was taken into custody in May 2025,pleaded guilty and agreed to testify as a statewitness.[26] He defending attorney was Jaiad Bin Amjad.[27]
On 10 July 2025, the ICT formallyindicted Sheikh Hasina on five counts of crimes against humanity.[28] The charges include orchestratingmass killings of protesters inDhaka, the use of helicopters and drones to fire on civilian crowds, theKilling of Abu Sayed, the incineration of bodies inAshulia to destroy evidence and the coordinatedkilling of demonstrators in Chankharpul.[29] The prosecution presented surveillance footage, drone logs, hospital records, and leaked government communications as part of its preliminary evidence.[30] The tribunal concluded that the evidence supported a finding of a state-orchestrated attack on a civilian population with the intent to intimidate, suppress dissent, and obstruct democratic mobilization.[31] A total of 203 individuals, alongside Sheikh Hasina and several former government and police officials, have been indicted by the Tribunal, with 73 currently in custody.[32]
Separate from the main trial, Hasina was convicted ofcontempt of court on 2 July 2025 following the release of an audio recording in which she was allegedly heard stating that she had a "licence to kill" due to having faced 227 legal cases in the past.[33]
The tribunal found the statement to be a direct affront to the integrity of the court and sentenced her to six months' imprisonmentin absentia. ICT maintained that the contempt conviction was procedurally independent from the war crimes charges.[34]
After the 10 July indictment, the tribunal scheduledopening statements for 3 August 2025, withwitness testimony to begin the following day.[35] Theprosecution indicated that it would call around 84 witnesses, including medical personnel, journalists, survivors, and former security officials.[36] The court appointedpublic defenders to represent the absent defendants under tribunal rules.[37]
On 3 August 2025, the prosecution presented its opening statement before a three‑judge panel headed by JusticeGolam Mortuza Mozumder.[38] The statement outlined five charges and referenced 11 emblematic incidents of alleged crimes, includingextrajudicial killings,enforced disappearances,torture, andobstruction of justice.[39]
On 4 August 2025, the tribunal heard the firstwitness testimony from Khokon Chandra Barmon, a protest survivor shot in the face in the Jatrabari crackdown.[40] He identified senior officials as responsible, including Sheikh Hasina, and demanded maximum punishment.[41] Another witness, Abdullah Al Imran, testified that he heard Hasina ordering hospital authorities "no release, no treatment" for injured protesters.[42] He was denied treatment at theNational Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedic Rehabilitation.[43]
The proceedings were broadcast live onstate television.[40] The defendantChowdhury Abdullah Al Mamun, who was in custody at the time and had pleaded guilty, was present in court and represented by counsel.[44] DefendantsSheikh Hasina andAsaduzzaman Khan Kamal were both tried in absentia and were represented by court‑appointed attorney Amir Hossain.[37]
On 17 November, 2025, the ICT found her guilty on three of the five charges[45] of preventing justice, ordering killings and failing to take measures to stop punitive killings.[46] The verdict, as read by Justice Golam Mortuza Mozumder[47] noted:[5]
Accused prime minister Sheikh Hasina committed crimes against humanity by her incitement order and also failure to take preventive and punitive measures under charge 1. Accused Sheikh Hasina committed one count of crimes against humanity by her order to use drones, helicopters and lethal weapons under charge number 2.
Hasina and Kamal were sentenced tocapital punishment as well as seizure of all assets belonging to them. The confiscation covers the properties declared in their affidavits submitted for the12th National Parliament Election.[48]
Though Mamun was found guilty, he avoided the death penalty as he turned into a state witness[49] and sentenced to five years in prison.[46][50] He also apologized to the court and the country.[51] Hasina's conviction was premised on her having ordered the deployment of drones, helicopters and lethal weapons, as well as "by virtue of her order" the killings of 12 protesters in the areas ofChankarpul in Dhaka and Ashulia in Savar. She was further sentenced to imprisonment, until the death penalty was carried out, on three other counts. The court further ordered compensation to the families of the victims.[5]
Following the death sentence, on 27 November, three cases brought by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) over property purchases in the Purbachal New Town project. resulted in a further 7-year sentence for each charge by Judge Mohammad Abdullah Al Mamun of Dhaka Special Judge Court-5.[52] His judgement ruled:[53]
[Hasina's conduct] demonstrates a persistent corruption mindset rooted in entitlement, unchecked power, and a greedy eye for public property. Treating public land as a private asset, she directed her greedy eye toward state resources and manipulated official procedures to benefit herself and her close relatives.
Her son, Sajeeb Wazed, and daughter, Saima Wazed, were also sentenced to five years in prison in one of the cases. Public Prosecutor Khan Moinul Hasan south to appeal the verdict seeking the maximum sentence.[53]
TheAwami League, now banned from electoral politics, condemned the tribunal as a "kangaroo court" and accused theinterim government of weaponising the judiciary to suppress dissent.[54] Party general secretaryObaidul Quader called the trial a "farce" designed for political vendetta by "anti-liberation" forces.[55] Hasina's son and advisorSajeeb Wazed Joy, predicted that his mother would be sentenced to death, but they would not appeal the verdict to theSupreme Court of Bangladesh unless an elected government took office with the Awami League[56] as well as threatening again to disrupt the 2026 general election.[57] He also said that she would be safe because India is providing her with security.[58] He further threatened to block the2026 Bangladeshi general election following their party's ban.[59]
International observers, including theUnited Nations Human Rights Office, expressed cautious support for judicial accountability while warning of serious rights concerns and urging impartiality.[60][61]
British journalistDavid Bergman expressed concern that the Tribunal-appointed lawyer representing both Sheikh Hasina and her co-accused,Asaduzzaman Khan, poses aconflict of interest, as their legal defenses could differ significantly and each should have separate representation.[62]
Prior to the announcement of the verdict, Hasina released an audio message in which she asserted that the allegations and charges against her were "false" and that she was still alive.[63]
The verdict was broadly welcomed by most Bangladeshi political parties as well as the general public.[64] Family members of the victims in court applauded the verdict.[45] In preparation for the verdict, police had issued shoot-at-sight orders against violent actors.[65] Later the army and police used batons and sound grenades against students fromDhaka College near Dhanmondi 32,[66] who had gathered with excavators todemolish the remnants of Hasina'sfather's house.[67] Demonstrators outside the International Crimes Tribunal staged a symbolic protest by broadcasting a mock "missing notice" for Hasina and her family, mimicking public announcements typically made for missing persons.[68] Students at theUniversity of Dhaka (DU) gathered at theTeacher–Student Centre (TSC) to watch the verdict on a large screen set up byDhaka University Central Students' Union (DUCSU), with many celebrating and distributingsweets.[69]
Chief ProsecutorMohammad Tajul Islam, who led the case, reacted to the verdict by saying that "all international norms and standards" and that the "evidence presented here would stand in any court in the world." He concluded by saying: "This verdict proves that no one is above the law, no matter how powerful."[5] Attorney GeneralMohammed Asaduzzaman reacted by saying: "This verdict will remain "a milestone for justice and the rule of law in Bangladesh."[70]
Hasina criticized the interim government of Muhammed Yunus by sayingHindus were allegedly being attacked, as well as criticizing alleged judicial impartiality. She issued a statement that read:[71] "They are biased and politically motivated. In their distasteful call for the death penalty, they reveal the brazen and murderous intent of extremist figures within the interim government to remove Bangladesh's last elected prime minister, and to nullify the Awami League as a political force."Her Awami League called for a countrywide shutdown that day.[72]
Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) leaderSalahuddin Ahmed spoke from DU and said that the punishment was "less than the gravity of the crimes" and that the "judgment proves that no matter how powerful a fascist or autocrat becomes, they will one day have to stand in the dock," while calling for other related cases to also result in such judgments."[5] BNP youth leader andMir Mugdho's brother, Mir Snigdho, said of the verdict against Mamun that "we will appeal...[the] five-year sentence, or at the very least, we want life imprisonment."[46]Jamaat-e-Islami leaderMia Golam Parwar hailed the verdict as "an important day for Bangladesh."[46] TheForeign Ministry of Bangladesh called on India to extradite Hasina. The statement read: "Providing refuge to these individuals, who have been convicted of crimes against humanity, by any other country would be a highly unfriendly act and a disregard for justice."[73]
UN High Commissioner for Human RightsVolker Türk wanted Bangladesh to "move forward with a comprehensive process of truth-telling, reparation and justice as the pathway to national reconciliation and healing." He added: "The Office stands ready to support the Government and people of Bangladesh in these endeavours." Human Rights Spokeswoman Ravina Shamdasani released a press statement stating that the "Hasina verdict is an important moment for victims." She added, though, that they oppose death penalties in all circumstances.[74]
India'sMinistry of External Affairs released a statement a few hours after the verdict that read they are aware of the decision and that "as a neighbour, India remains committed to the best interests of the people of Bangladesh."[75] It added: "We will always engage constructively with all stakeholders to that end."[76]
Amnesty International andHuman Rights Watch expressed concerns over the fairness and speed of the trial process andabsence of the convicted persona in the trial, while asserting the significance of the trial for the families of the victims. They also maintained their position againstcapital punishment.[77][78]
According toAl Jazeera, Sheikh Hasina's extradition from India is unlikely.[78][79] due to close ties with her party andstrained relations with the interim government of Bangladesh.[79] Sanjay Bharadwaj, a professor of theJawaharlal Nehru University, said that theincumbent government of Bangladesh is viewed as "anti-India forces" by the Indian government, and Hasina's return would mean "legitimizing" them.[79] Michael Kugelman, senior fellow with the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada, expressed concerns of violent actions from the Awami League in reaction to the verdict ahead of 2026 general election.[78] Sabir Mustafa, former head ofBBC Bangla, considered the trial to be "seriously flawed," and that a death penalty for a case held in absentia was "unjust."[78]
Indian pro-government news channels such asRepublic Bangla,News 18,Swadesh News andAsia Net News broadcast or used a still image of a video that shows a major torchlight procession, which they claimed to be a demonstration of the post-verdict "shutdown" programme of the Awami League in Bangladesh. However,Prothom Alo found that the procession was organised by a BNP faction days before the trial over the local electoral nomination-related problems.[80]
| Premiership | |
|---|---|
| Governments | |
| Elections | |
| Family |
|
| Related |
|
