Hasina Found Guilty of Crimes Against Humanity

Human Rights Watch logo

The International Crimes Tribunal of Bangladesh on November 17, 2025, found Sheikh Hasina, the former prime minister, and Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal, the former home minister, guilty of crimes against humanity during the violent suppression of student-led protests in 2024, Human Rights Watch said today.

Both were prosecuted in absentia, not represented by counsel of their choosing, and sentenced to death, raising serious human rights concerns. The third accused in the case, Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun, a former police chief who is in custody and served as a prosecution witness, was given a reduced sentence of five years in prison.

“There is enduring anger and anguish in Bangladesh over Hasina’s repressive rule, but all criminal proceedings need to meet international fair trial standards,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Those responsible for horrific abuses under the Hasina administration should be held to account after impartial investigations and credible trials.”

The Bangladeshi authorities committed serious human rights violations during the three weeks of protests in July and August 2024 that toppled the Hasina government. The protests and crackdown resulted in about 1,400 deaths, mostly protesters shot dead by security forces, according to a United Nations report.

While those responsible for abuses should be appropriately held to account, the prosecution failed to meet international fair trial standards, including for a full opportunity to present a defense and question the witnesses against them, and the right to be represented by counsel of one’s choosing. Concerns over the fairness of the trial are exacerbated by the death sentences.

The three defendants were accused of inciting widespread and systemic attacks on protesters by security forces and supporters of Hasina’s Awami League party, and ordering the use of drones, helicopters, and lethal weapons to target unarmed demonstrators. They were also accused of failing to prevent atrocities or take punitive action in three specific cases of illegal killings by the security forces.

The prosecution produced 54 witnesses. About half of them provided expert testimony, while the rest were victims or family members.

The evidence against Hasina included audio recordings of conversations with officials in which she appeared to order the use of lethal weapons. While a government-appointed defense lawyer for Hasina and Khan, who received no instructions from the defendants, could cross-examine witness, he did not produce any witnesses to counter the allegations.

Trials in absentia fundamentally undermine the right to a fair trial as set out in article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which is crucial to a legitimate legal process. The UN Human Rights Committee, which monitors compliance with the ICCPR, has stated that to guarantee defendants’ rights, “all criminal proceedings must provide the accused with the right to an oral hearing, at which he or she may appear in person or be represented by counsel and may bring evidence and examine witnesses.”

In their 453-page ruling, the judges said that article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which defines crimes against humanity, had formed the basis of the tribunal’s proceeding, and that the testimony of the victims had informed its finding of crimes against humanity. The judges also said that while Hasina in recent interviews blamed “breakdowns in discipline among security forces on the ground,” she also accepted her “leadership responsibility.”

The need for justice and accountability for serious rights violations by the Hasina government, including enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and torture, is critical, Human Rights Watch said. However, Bangladesh authorities have a long history, including under the Hasina government, of bringing politically motivated cases, including before the International Crimes Tribunal, to arbitrarily arrest and detain, unfairly prosecute, and in some cases carry out death sentences against political opponents.

Such practices have continued under the interim government led by Muhammad Yunus, who took charge in August 2024 after Hasina fled to neighboring India.

The International Crimes Tribunal is a domestic court that Hasina created in 2010, originally to prosecute crimes against humanity during Bangladesh’s 1971 independence movement. Tribunal proceedings during Hasina’s rule repeatedly failed to meet international fair trial standards and imposed the death penalty. Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because of its inherent cruelty.

While the Yunus government has not abolished the death penalty, it amended the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act in November 2024 to bring provisions on command responsibility and crimes against humanity closer to the ICC’s Rome Statute. The amendments specifically list enforced disappearances as a crime.

However, further amendments in 2025 gave the tribunal broad authority to prosecute and dismantle political organizations, which could be used to violate international standards of due process and freedom of association. In the Hasina trial verdict, the tribunal did not rule on dismantling the Awami League but said the government should confiscate Hasina and Khan’s properties to compensate victims. Hasina is also a defendant in three more cases before the tribunal, two relating to enforced disappearances during her rule and one relating to mass killings in 2013.

The Yunus government should adopt measures to ensure that the fundamental rights of the accused are protected, Human Rights Watch said. Articles 47(3) and 47A of Bangladesh’s constitution specifically strip those accused of international crimes, such as crimes against humanity, of fundamental rights that are otherwise guaranteed to defendants. These include the right to protection of the law (article 31), fair trial guarantees (article 35), and the right to seek remedies from the Supreme Court for the violation of fundamental rights (article 44). The Bangladeshi government should ensure equal access to constitutional remedies for all defendants, and to impose a moratorium on the death penalty with a plan to abolish it altogether.

The government should respond to any demonstrations in accordance with the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, Human Rights Watch said. Awami League leaders should discourage violence by party supporters opposing the tribunal verdict.

The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Bangladeshi government signed a three-year Memorandum of Understanding in July 2025 to open a mission in the country “to support the promotion and protection of human rights.” The interim government, which has pledged to hold elections in February 2026, should also seek international assistance for fair trials. Such assistance will require a moratorium on capital punishment.

Following the guilty verdicts, Bangladesh’s Foreign Ministry called on the Indian government to turn over Hasina and Khan, citing an extradition agreement between the two countries. While Indian authorities should support accountability efforts in Bangladesh, any extradition request should allow for the individuals sought to contest the extradition in legal proceedings in India that meet due process standards. No one should be extradited if they would face a trial abroad that does not meet international fair trial standards and could result in the death penalty.

“Victims of grave rights violations committed under the Hasina government need justice and reparations through proceedings that are genuinely independent and fair,” Ganguly said. “Ensuring justice also means protecting the rights of the accused, including by abolishing the death penalty, which is inherently cruel and irreversible.” - Human Rights Watch