Dhaka's Fury: Justice Served? 🇧🇩🔥

World News

The former prime minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina, has been sentenced to death following a trial conducted within the country, centered on her role during the violent crackdown on student-led protests that occurred last year and ultimately led to her removal from power. Found guilty of allowing the use of lethal force against the protesters, resulting in approximately 1,400 deaths, the trial was held in absentia as Hasina has resided in India since 2024. The proceedings stemmed from longstanding accusations that she authorized the actions of security forces, a charge families of the victims and injured have long demanded be addressed with severe penalties. Throughout her fifteen years in office, Hasina faced repeated accusations of suppressing dissent through politically motivated arrests and, at times, extrajudicial killings. The initial protests began with demands to eliminate government job quotas but quickly evolved into a broader movement against her leadership, intensified by heightened tensions in Dhaka preceding the verdict, marked by increased security and recurring protests. Evidence presented during the trial, including leaked audio recordings, suggested she authorized the use of lethal weapons. Families directly impacted by the violence expressed a desire for substantial punishment for Hasina and those responsible, while acknowledging the lasting trauma – including permanent injuries, such as amputations, suffered by many. In response to the verdict, Hasina released a detailed statement asserting that the interim government’s actions were designed to dismantle her political party, the Awami League. She defended her government’s record on human rights and expressed her willingness to face a fair trial. Adding to the complexity, the upcoming parliamentary election in February 2026, during which the Awami League, Hasina’s party, is currently banned by the interim government, presents a significant diplomatic challenge for both India and Bangladesh, particularly as Dhaka has formally requested Hasina’s extradition – a request India has so far refused to acknowledge. Hasina’s lawyer, Mohammad Amir Hossain, expressed disappointment, stating, “I even cannot appeal because my clients are absent; that’s why I am sad.” The prevailing sentiment within Bangladesh remains deeply divided; rights activist Shireen Huq noted that “the anger against Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League has not subsided,” and highlighted the lack of an apology or acknowledgement of the loss of hundreds of lives during the protests. David Bergman, a long-term observer of Bangladesh, believes the conviction itself could further complicate the Awami League’s ability to reintegrate into Bangladeshi politics, suggesting that “if there is some kind of apology and a distancing from Sheikh Hasina and the old leadership, that may change things.”