Home
+
Published : 19 Nov 2025, 02:22 AM
After former prime minister Sheikh Hasina was sentenced to death for crimes against humanity in last year’s July Uprising, questions have arisen over what steps India will take regarding her extradition from Delhi, where she currently resides.
Equally pressing is how much pressure Bangladesh can realistically exert on India to secure her return.
Under the bilateral extradition treaty, Bangladesh can request the repatriation of a convicted criminal, but things get highly complex when the individual in question is a former prime minister and a “close friend” of Delhi.
Analysts suggest that in the present circumstances, India is unlikely to respond positively. Political considerations, rather than the strictures of the treaty, are expected to dominate the decision-making process.
Amena Mohsin, a retired professor of international relations at Dhaka University, said: “I do not believe India will allow Hasina to be returned. If one follows the political context in India, their media, and the personal rapport between Hasina and certain Indian circles, the picture is clear.
“This is not about her alone; numerous Awami League leaders reside there as well. India is likely to treat this as a political matter.”
After being ousted on Aug 5 last year in the student-led mass uprising, Hasina fled to India and took refuge there as a “guest” of the Indian government, according to Indian media reports.
On Monday, the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) in Dhaka sentenced Hasina to death for crimes against humanity, alongside her home minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal.
A third suspect in the case, former police chief Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun was given a five-year “lenient” sentence after cooperating with the investigation, turning state witness and confessing to the charges.
Bangladesh first formally requested Hasina’s extradition in December, after initiating trial proceedings in October of last year, through a “note verbale” sent to Delhi in accordance with the extradition treaty.
In June this year, the ICT issued an arrest warrant against Hasina. Although one case reached conclusion, the Indian government has not responded to the extradition request.
In October, in response to a question relating to the letter from Dhaka, India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said Delhi was reviewing the legal issues involved.
Following Monday’s death sentence, the interim government renewed its call for Hasina and Kamal’s return.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement: “The verdict given by the International Crimes Tribunal held both absconding accused Hasina and Asaduzzaman guilty and sentenced them for the murders during the July Uprising.
It added that any country offering asylum to these individuals would be “extremely unfriendly and demeaning to justice”.
“We urge the Indian government to immediately hand over these two convicts to the Bangladeshi authorities. It is also a legal obligation for India as per the existing extradition treaty between the two countries,” it said.
Interim government advisors Touhid Hossain and Asif Nazrul confirmed that Dhaka will send another letter to Delhi requesting Hasina’s repatriation.
Chief Prosecutor Tajul Islam added that extradition efforts would also be pursued through Interpol.
Former diplomat Munshi Faiz Ahmad argued that formal communication with India is the only viable path.
“Bangladesh has little chance of acting through other channels. The only approach is bilateral dialogue -- sending letters, maintaining discussions. But whether this will yield any positive outcome is highly uncertain,” he said.
India, meanwhile, issued a measured statement after the tribunal’s ruling, without commenting directly on the verdict.
It emphasised Delhi’s commitment to Bangladeshi people’s “best interests as a close neighbour”, and expressed a desire to advance those interests through “constructive engagement with all stakeholders” in a framework of peace, democracy, inclusion, and stability.
Bangladesh and India signed an extradition treaty in January 2013 to facilitate the return of criminals from one country to the other, primarily to combat terrorism.
Both countries have previously repatriated suspects under this treaty.
In November 2015, Bangladesh returned Nur Hossain, accused in a seven-murder case in Narayanganj, from Kolkata.
India, in the same period, received separatist leader Anup Chetia of the ULFA along with two others from Bangladesh, although at the time then home minister Kamal clarified that Chetia’s handover was outside the formal treaty framework.
Despite the treaty, India has not responded to the December letter from Dhaka, although it acknowledged receipt.
Indian media reports suggest that Article 6 of the treaty allows Delhi to refuse extradition if the charges are of a “political character”, a provision analysts believe could be invoked.
Hasina has maintained that the verdict against her is “biased and politically motivated”. Yet the treaty itself outlines 13 categories of crimes that are not considered political in nature.
These include offences specified in multilateral treaties, murder, incitement to murder, and acts causing loss of life or property through explosions.
The charges for which Hasina was sentenced relate to the July protests, including ordering the use of drones, helicopters, and lethal weapons, six killings at Chankharpul, five at Ashulia, followed by burning, and one person burnt alive.
The treaty also states that if the individual in question challenges extradition in the court of the requested country while proceedings are ongoing, extradition shall not occur.
Indian media outlet Firstpost highlighted that “any extradition request would have to be processed through the Indian legal system, where Hasina could challenge the move in court, a process that would likely be lengthy”.
“Ultimately, an extradition is seen as highly improbable, as New Delhi is expected to prioritise its legal and diplomatic autonomy over complying with a politically sensitive request.
“India could refuse to extradite Hasina due to legal complexities, political considerations, and human rights concerns.”
Writing from Kuwait and Morocco, former Indian diplomat Prabhu Dayal emphasises that India’s decision on Hasina’s return will hinge less on legal obligations and more on geopolitical considerations.
“Hasina is important to India because she was a consistent and crucial ally for regional security and strategic interests during her long tenure as Bangladesh’s prime minister.
Despite the existence of an extradition treaty, former Bangladeshi diplomat Faiz notes that many countries often do not implement such agreements.
“Even when an extradition treaty exists, many countries do not act on it. So while Bangladesh has the treaty, there is little reason to assume it can exert meaningful pressure for compliance.
“Especially given the current state of bilateral relations, Dhaka should focus not on chasing this issue but on how to strengthen ties with India.
“A healthy relationship enables action; when relations are strained, expecting everything to fall into place is unrealistic.”
TENSIONS CLOUD BILATERAL TIES
Hasina’s stay in Delhi following her removal from office, along with comments made from there, has put Bangladesh-India relations under visible strain.
International relations expert Prof Mohsin expressed concern that Hasina's extradition request and the activities she is reportedly carrying out from India could further strain ties, potentially leading to a deeper chill between the two nations.
Munshi Faiz said the focus should not remain solely on Hasina’s extradition issue but rather on advancing India-Bangladesh relations from a broader perspective.
Referring to India’s statements after Hasina’s verdict, Prof Mohsin noted that India has expressed its intention to work with all stakeholders.
She questioned who exactly constitutes these stakeholders and highlighted that India has repeatedly emphasised its preference for an inclusive election.
She added that tensions have been running since July, and public pressure on India may grow.
On another question, she said the friendship had already been cold for some time, pointing out that India has long maintained a party-centric relationship with Bangladesh.
She said some waiting is required, but deterioration is possible. Future elected governments, she argued, may also exert pressure on India, though she doubts India will accept such pressure.
Referring to the interim government’s repeated calls to India to stop Hasina’s statements, the analyst said: “She’s been issuing different types of statements from there, and India is being urged to halt them. The nature of her activities and the statements being made have raised many concerns.”
Former ambassador Faiz said, "I believe the most important thing is to handle the situation pragmatically. We will do what we can on our side -- of course, we’ll send letters, ask for her extradition. But if India doesn't respond positively, should we let this one issue stall our ties, or should we seek to move forward and build a more normal connection?"
He went on to say, "If we aim for a more normal connection, we can address issues that have not been moving forward. We should think comprehensively about how to restore normalcy to Bangladesh-India ties and take initiatives in that direction. The national interest remains the highest priority, and there is no reason to lose sight of that."
In addition to seeking Hasina’s extradition for trial, the Yunus government has accused her of attempting to “destabilise” Bangladesh from her base in Delhi.
On the other hand, India has raised concerns about the "security" of minorities in Bangladesh, urging steps to address the issue.
The Indian government has also criticised certain media outlets in Bangladesh for spreading "falsehoods" and engaging in "exaggerated propaganda."
Diplomatic tensions have flared with reciprocal calls for diplomats, with both sides issuing statements on a range of issues, including border matters and Hasina’s remarks from Delhi.
In the midst of this diplomatic friction, trade restrictions have also been imposed.
Most recently, on May 17, India announced the suspension of imports of Bangladeshi garments and processed food products through the land port.
The foreign ministry in Dhaka “summoned” India’s deputy high commissioner on Nov 12, demanding that Hasina stop giving interviews to international media from Delhi.
