Death Sentence Against Hasina Sparks India's Intense Diplomatic Repercussions

Bangladesh has entered a new and unprecedented phase after the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) reportedly sentenced former ruler Sheikh Hasina to death in absentia for killings during last year’s student-led uprising. Following her ouster from power, Hasina fled to India, where she has remained since.

She was tried under an expanded ICT law, culminating in a verdict that has triggered heated political, diplomatic, and social reactions both domestically and globally.

Experts from the US-based think tank Atlantic Council say the ruling is reshaping Bangladesh’s political landscape, societal divides, and the country’s regional diplomacy. They argue that while the verdict signifies accountability for victims of the July 2024 protests, it has also deepened polarization, heightened pre-election tensions, and brought new dynamics into Bangladesh–India relations. The months ahead, they say, will determine which direction the country ultimately takes.

Historic Turning Point, Says Rudabeh Shahid

Rudabeh Shahid, Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center and Visiting Assistant Professor of Government at Wesleyan University, views the verdict as a defining moment in Bangladesh’s complex political trajectory. She stresses that public reaction cannot be fully understood without considering the ICT’s history and earlier controversies, particularly allegations of political bias during trials of Jamaat-e-Islami leaders under the previous Awami League government.

Shahid highlights a generational contrast:
A decade ago, the Shahbagh movement—led largely by millennial youth—mobilized masses demanding the death penalty for wartime collaborators. Today, Generation Z is confronting a different reality. Many of them welcome the ruling out of solidarity with fellow students killed during the July movement, though not necessarily out of support for capital punishment itself.

She also notes that India is unlikely to extradite Hasina. New Delhi has voiced concerns over the trial process, while longstanding ties between India’s political establishment and Hasina’s family further complicate the matter. She warns that with the Awami League now barred from contesting the upcoming election, political competition could become one-sided, fuelling long-term polarization.

According to Shahid, the verdict has split Bangladeshis into two distinct groups: those who see it as long-awaited justice, and those who consider it an obstacle to national reconciliation.

India Caught in a Delicate Balancing Act: Kugelman

South Asia analyst and Foreign Policy magazine’s South Asia Brief writer Michael Kugelman assesses the situation through the lens of Bangladesh–India relations. Hasina’s presence in India has put New Delhi in an extremely difficult position.

Hasina has long been one of India’s closest political allies, with strong personal connections across ruling and opposition parties. Yet India also needs to maintain strong ties with Bangladesh’s new leadership for strategic reasons—from trade and connectivity to border security and regional stability.

Kugelman believes India will not extradite her, but keeping her indefinitely on Indian soil could strain relations with Dhaka. The “most realistic option,” he argues, may be to facilitate her relocation to a third country—one that can guarantee her security and limit her political activity. Potential host countries under discussion range from Eastern Europe to the Gulf, though it remains uncertain whether any would accept such a high-profile figure.

“Hasina remains a ‘special guest’ in India,” he says, “but as Bangladesh’s election draws nearer, New Delhi’s strategic calculus is shifting.”

Recognition for Victims, Yet Questions Over Due Process: Wahiduzzaman Noor

Bangladeshi national security expert and former diplomat Wahiduzzaman Noor says the ruling offers formal recognition and closure to families of those killed in the July protests—acknowledging their suffering at a state level.

However, he notes that the tribunal’s process has raised serious concerns. Human rights groups have questioned the administrative expansion of the ICT Act, the speed of the trial, the decision to try Hasina in absentia, and the tribunal’s refusal to appoint a defence lawyer for her. Despite these controversies, many still see the verdict as symbolic of long-demanded justice.

Noor points out that Hasina continues to enjoy deep loyalty within the Awami League, which is expected to allow her to lead from abroad. With India unwilling to send her back due to both political sensitivities and the presence of a death sentence, extradition appears extremely unlikely.

The domestic reaction, he says, is sharply divided—opposition supporters view the verdict as overdue justice, while Awami League supporters call it political revenge. A surge in political violence in the days before the ruling signals potential instability in the run-up to the election.

Call for National Unity and Responsible Leadership

M. Osman Siddique, Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center and former US Ambassador to Fiji, urges political leaders to approach the situation from a perspective of national unity and peace.

He describes Bangladesh as being at a “highly sensitive moment,” requiring restraint from all sides. He emphasizes the need for transparent judicial processes and adherence to the rule of law to maintain public trust.

Siddique stresses that peace, security, and responsible leadership are more critical now than ever. Regardless of political views on the verdict, he says, safeguarding national stability should be the foremost priority.

According to him, Bangladesh stands at a crossroads—where unity and visionary leadership will determine the country’s future path.