On 17 November, Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) found the country’s former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina guilty of crimes against humanity during the 2024 July uprising that resulted in the death of nearly 1,400 civilians, in a violent government crackdown on anti-government protestors. The ICT is a domestic war-crimes tribunal established in 2009 by the Awami League government to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and other atrocities committed during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War against Pakistan.
The three-member tribunal led by Justice Golam Mortuza Mozumder sentenced Sheikh Hasina to death penalty on two counts, one over the killing of six unarmed protesters in Dhaka's Chankharpul on 04 August 2025, and another for the shooting of six students in Ashulia, five of whom were allegedly burned after death and the sixth possibly set on fire while still alive. Additionally, she was sentenced to imprisonment for life for making inflammatory remarks and ordering the use of lethal force against student demonstrators. Hasina is also facing three additional cases before the ICT, two over enforced disappearances and another concerning the alleged mass killings at Motijheel’s Shapla Chattar in 2013. Former home minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal was also awarded the death penalty while former inspector general of police Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun, who testified as a state witness, was sentenced to five years' imprisonment.
What is the background?
Firstly, the unemployment crisis and the quota system. Tensions emerged in June 2024 when the Bangladesh High Court reinstated the controversial quota system reserving 30 per cent of civil service posts for descendants of 1971 Liberation War fighters, reversing its 2018 abolition. Amidst the weakened economy and youth unemployment crisis, the decision was criticized as widely benefiting Awami League loyalists. Student groups demanded merit-based recruitment and launched nationwide campus protests, but were largely ignored by the Awami League government.
Second, inflammatory remarks and government crackdown. In July, Prime Minister Hasina termed the student protesters 'razakars,' a derogatory term referring to Pakistan-collaborators during the Liberation war. The members of the Awami league also attacked student protesters at the Dhaka University, escalating to six deaths. The movement transformed into a larger pro-democracy, anti-government movement calling for the PM's resignation. On 04 August, state forces cracked down violently, killing more than 50 people in a single day. A report from the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) revealed that nearly 1,400 people were killed in the brutal crackdown by the government, 12 -13 per cent of whom were children. The report highlighted systematic abuses including arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, torture, and sexual violence involving security agencies and Awami League affiliates.
Third, the PM’s ousting and the ban on the Awami League. On 05 August, protesters stormed the PM's residence and the Parliament, forcing Sheikh Hasina, Bangladesh’s longest serving Prime Minister of 15 years, to resign and flee to India. The parliament was dissolved and a new interim government led by Nobel Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus as chief advisor was instated. Subsequently, in 2025, the interim government barred the Awami League from all political activities under the Anti-terrorism Act, and established that the proscription would remain in place until the ICT concluded trials against the party leadership for the July massacre.
What have been the responses?
Sheikh Hasina has staunchly opposed the verdict, denied all charges, terming the verdict “biased and politically motivated.” Ahead of the hearing, Hasina had dismissed the tribunal as unfair, and remarked that a guilty verdict was “a foregone conclusion.” The domestic reception of the verdict has largely been along political lines. The Awami League has also discredited the verdict and has announced a nation-wide shutdown.
The interim government hailed the decision as “historic” and “long-awaited,” rejecting Hasina’s claims of bias. Chief Advisor Muhammad Yunus asserted that the tribunal operated transparently and that the verdict affirms key principles of justice, recognizing victims’ suffering and proving that “no one, regardless of power, is above the law.” Major political parties including the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), Jamaat-e-Islami, and the student-led National Citizen Party (NCP), as well as the Dhaka University Central Students’ Union (DUCSU) and other student and activist groups, have welcomed the ruling as a decisive blow against authoritarianism.
However, international reactions have been far more critical. The UN and multiple rights organizations have questioned the fairness of trials held in absentia and condemned the death sentence. The UN stressed that accountability must meet international standards of due process and reiterated its opposition to capital punishment. Amnesty International likewise argued that the proceedings were “neither fair nor just,” noting longstanding concerns over the tribunal’s independence.
What does this mean?
Firstly, potential political turmoil. Dhaka has been gripped by escalating political volatility in recent weeks. The Awami League, banned by the interim government, has announced a ‘Dhaka lockdown’ and violence has broken out in several parts of the country. While the other political parties, student organisations and other anti-AL forces could mobilise against the lockdown. The verdict could further alienate the polarized groups and escalate the unrest.
Second, impact on the elections. The ruling comes at a pivotal moment ahead of Bangladesh’s first parliamentary election since Sheikh Hasina’s ouster, scheduled for February 2026. The verdict may be wielded against the Awami League, threatening its political resurgence as the party is already barred from the upcoming election. In the absence of the Awami League, the BNP emerges as the major political force. The imposed absence of an opposition could erode the credibility of the elections.
Third, international strain. As several human rights agencies have sounded alarm over the legitimacy of the hastened trial and its severe sentencing, the interim government risks scrutiny over its own intentions. This can also undermine the credibility of the upcoming elections on the global stage. Further, India-Bangladesh relations may also face added strain, as New Delhi has provided asylum to Sheikh Hasina since her ousting and deliberates Dhaka’s extradition requests.
About the author
Brighty Ann Sarah is a postgraduate student at Stella Maris College, Chennai.
