Implications of Sheikh Hasina’s Death Sentence & India’s Diplomatic Dilemma

Will India Extradite Sheikh Hasina or Not?: On November 17, 2025, a special tribunal in Dhaka, Bangladesh, delivered a historic and controversial verdict: former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was sentenced to death in absentia for crimes against humanity, specifically for her role in the brutal crackdown on student-led protests in 2024. The protests, which ultimately led to her ousting, saw up to 1,400 deaths, according to the United Nations. Hasina, who fled to India in August 2024, now finds herself at the center of a geopolitical storm, as Bangladesh demands her extradition and India faces a complex diplomatic and ethical dilemma.

This op-ed explores the implications of Hasina’s death sentence, the legal and political ramifications for Bangladesh, and the challenges India faces in balancing justice, diplomacy, and regional stability.

Sheikh Hasina Verdict: Justice or Political Retribution?

The tribunal’s decision to sentence Sheikh Hasina to death is unprecedented in Bangladesh’s history. The charges—incitement, ordering killings, and inaction to prevent atrocities—are grave, and the tribunal’s ruling has been hailed by some as a triumph of justice. Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, who now heads Bangladesh’s interim government, called the verdict a “historic” affirmation that “no one, regardless of power, is above the law”.

However, the trial and verdict are not without controversy. Hasina and her supporters have dismissed the proceedings as politically motivated, arguing that the tribunal lacks legitimacy and was established by an unelected government. Her son, Sajeeb Wazed, called the verdict “a joke and meaningless,” asserting that the trials were “legally flawed” and would not withstand scrutiny under a democratically elected government. [Also Read - Hasina Extradition Conundrum: Ultra-Capitalism's Shadow Over Democratic Resilience in South Asia]

The absence of Hasina and her refusal to participate in the trial further complicate the legal standing of the verdict. International law generally requires that defendants have the right to a fair trial and the opportunity to defend themselves. The in absentia nature of the trial raises questions about due process and the potential for the verdict to be seen as an act of political retribution rather than justice.

Bangladesh’s Demand for Sheikh Hasina's Extradition

Bangladesh’s interim government has wasted no time in demanding Hasina’s extradition from India. Citing the bilateral extradition treaty between the two countries, Dhaka has argued that India is legally obligated to hand over Hasina and her former home minister, Asaduzzaman Khan, who was also sentenced to death.

The demand places India in a precarious position. On one hand, India has historically maintained a policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of its neighbors. On the other, refusing to extradite Hasina could be perceived as a diplomatic snub, potentially straining relations with Bangladesh—a country of strategic importance to India, particularly for its border security and regional stability.

India’s response so far has been measured. The Ministry of External Affairs acknowledged the verdict but stopped short of committing to extradition, stating that India remains “committed to the best interests of the people of Bangladesh, including in peace, democracy, inclusion, and stability”. This ambiguity reflects India’s need to balance its legal obligations, humanitarian considerations, and geopolitical interests. 

India’s Dilemma: Legal, Ethical, and Strategic Considerations

India’s decision on whether to extradite Sheikh Hasina is fraught with legal, ethical, and strategic implications.

Legal Considerations Extraditing Hasina:

The extradition treaty between India and Bangladesh requires that extradition requests be evaluated based on the evidence and the nature of the charges. However, the treaty also includes provisions that allow India to refuse extradition if there are concerns about the fairness of the trial or the potential for political persecution. Given Hasina’s claims of a biased tribunal and the lack of due process, India may have grounds to deny the request on legal grounds.

Ethical Considerations Extraditing Hasina:

Extraditing Hasina to face execution would raise serious ethical questions. India, which abolished the death penalty in all but the rarest cases, may be reluctant to send an individual to a country where they face capital punishment. This is particularly true given the international scrutiny and potential backlash from human rights organizations.

Strategic Considerations Extraditing Hasina:

Bangladesh is a key partner for India in South Asia, and maintaining stable relations is crucial for regional security. However, India must also consider the message that extraditing Hasina would send to other political leaders in the region. If perceived as capitulating to Bangladesh’s demands, India could risk alienating allies and undermining its own diplomatic leverage.

Regional and International Repercussions of Extraditing Hasina

The verdict and the extradition debate have broader implications for South Asia and the international community.

Regional Stability:

Bangladesh is already grappling with political instability, rising Islamist influence, and human rights concerns. The death sentence and the ongoing extradition saga could further polarize the country, deepening divisions between Hasina’s supporters and opponents. If India refuses to extradite her, it could exacerbate tensions between the two nations, potentially destabilizing the region.

International Precedent:

The case sets a precedent for how countries handle the prosecution of former leaders accused of human rights abuses. The international community will be watching closely to see whether the trial is viewed as a legitimate pursuit of justice or a politically motivated witch hunt. The United Nations and human rights organizations have already expressed concerns about the fairness of the proceedings and the potential for further unrest in Bangladesh.

The Way Forward Sheikh Hasina Extradition Diplomatic Dilemma

For Bangladesh, the sheikh hasina verdict is a step toward addressing the atrocities committed during the 2024 protests. However, true justice and reconciliation will require more than a symbolic trial. The interim government must ensure that the legal process is transparent, fair, and inclusive, and that all those responsible for human rights abuses are held accountable.

For India, the path forward is more complex. It must carefully weigh its legal obligations, ethical considerations, and strategic interests. Engaging in quiet diplomacy with Bangladesh to address the underlying issues—such as ensuring a fair and inclusive political process—may be more productive than a public confrontation over extradition. 

Ultimately, the Hasina case underscores the need for a balanced approach that prioritizes justice, human rights, and regional stability. The international community, including India, has a role to play in supporting Bangladesh’s transition to a more democratic and inclusive future—one that respects the rule of law and the rights of all its citizens.

Sheikh Hasina’s death sentence is a landmark event with far-reaching consequences. It tests the boundaries of justice, the limits of political retribution, and the complexities of international diplomacy. As Bangladesh seeks to turn the page on a turbulent chapter in its history, and as India navigates its own diplomatic tightrope, the world will be watching to see whether this moment leads to healing or further division.

The stakes are high, and the choices made in the coming weeks and months will shape not only the future of Bangladesh but also the broader landscape of South Asian politics. In the end, the pursuit of justice must be tempered by wisdom, compassion, and a commitment to the principles that bind nations together in the pursuit of peace and stability.