Sheikh Hasina: Bangladesh plans to execute its former leader. There’s one big thing in the way: India

She was once cast as a secular heroine, the daughter of a revolutionary leader, whose brutal assassination in the 1970s defined her political ascent.

But Sheikh Hasina’s rise to the top of Bangladesh’s politics preceded a stunning fall from power to self-exile in India.

A death sentence delivered in absentia could now see her executed – if New Delhi decides to send her back.

The ousted leader was found guilty of crimes against humanity for the violent suppression of student protests that toppled her regime in 2024.

She fled to India last August after 15 years of increasingly authoritarian rule, seeking refuge in the capital of one of her closest allies.

Now she’s become a pawn in a tense standoff between the two countries as Dhaka demands her extradition to face justice for crimes that she insists she did not commit.

“She had to flee the country to flee the rage of the people,” said Bangladeshi political scientist Mubashar Hasan. “Hiding in India and handed down a death penalty. It’s quite an extraordinary story.”

Hasina’s political journey is a story of Shakespearean proportions – a saga of tragedy, exile and power inextricably linked to the history of her home country.

The eldest daughter of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the charismatic “Father of the Nation,” she was thrust into politics early in life as she witnessed Bangladesh’s struggle for autonomy from Pakistan. But it was a single, bloody night in August 1975 that truly forged her path.

In a brutal military coup, army officers assassinated her father, her mother, and three of her brothers in their Dhaka home. Hasina and her sister survived as they were visiting West Germany at the time.

In the chaotic aftermath, Gen. Ziaur Rahman – the husband of her future arch-nemesis, Khaleda Zia – rose to power, his regime passing a law that would protect Mujibur’s assassins for decades.

Overnight, Hasina’s life was transformed, and she was forced into six years of exile in India, which imprinted a deep respect for the Indian state on the future leader.

When she finally returned to Bangladesh in 1981, it was to a nation clamoring for its founding ideals of secularism. But she also entered a political arena about to be defined by another woman pushed into tragedy: Zia, whose husband had himself been assassinated.

Recalling the day of her return from forced exile, Hasina said: “When I landed at the airport, I didn’t get anyone of my (relatives) but received love of millions of people, and that was my only strength.”

Thus began the era of the “Battling Begums” – a deeply personal, yet destructive duel between two women that would grip Bangladesh for the next 30 years.

Taking the helm of her father’s Awami League, Hasina embarked on a long journey through the political wilderness, navigating house arrests and crackdowns amid a growing rivalry with Zia. In 1996, Hasina led her party to electoral victory, becoming Prime Minister for the first time.

Her first act in office was to announce the prosecution of those involved in the 1975 coup and murders of her family, finally beginning a quest for justice.

A secular Muslim, Hasina served for one term, losing the next election to Zia. But when she returned to power in 2008, she was seen as a changed leader – someone more resolute, less trusting and determined to permanently secure her position.

For the next 15 years, she ruled Bangladesh with an increasingly iron fist, ushering an era of strong economic growth. At the same time, she gave India crucial support, bolstering New Delhi through economic and security deals in a neighborhood that includes adversaries Pakistan and China.

But Bangladesh’s developmental success came at a steep price: human rights organizations warned that she and her government were headed toward a one-party system. Critics expressed concerns over increased reports of political violence, voter intimidation, and harassment of the media and opposition figures.

As the pressure mounted, Hasina “could bank on India for full-fledged, no questions asked support,” The Indian Express newspaper reflected in a recent editorial.

At home, however, her image became associated with an aggressive crackdown.

“She committed so much bloodshed to be in power,” the political scientist Hasan said.

Hasina’s grip on power was seemingly unbreakable. She had proven adept at surviving storms of popular protest, arrests and assassination attempts, but the youth-led uprising that erupted last year was different.

What began as student demonstrations over civil service job quotas quickly swelled into a nationwide roar for her resignation. The regime’s response was a brutal crackdown that, according to the UN human rights office, left as many as 1,400 people dead.

But the bloodshed did not crush the movement – it galvanized it, turning public anger into an unstoppable force that ultimately toppled her government.

“She had to flee,” Hasan said. “That act itself is an acknowledgement of guilt. The people, the forces, everyone turned against her because she pushed the boundaries. She killed, her order was to kill so many.”

Hasina’s life as a political refugee in New Delhi brings her story full circle, returning her to the same state of exile she endured nearly half a century ago.

Hasina was tried in absentia and sentenced to death by the International Crimes Tribunal, Bangladesh’s domestic war crimes court – a judicial body that she helped set up. There, Hasina faced charges primarily related to inciting the murder of protesters, ordering demonstrators be hanged, and ordering the use of lethal weapons, drones and helicopters to suppress the unrest.

The court found it “crystal clear” that she had ordered the killing of student demonstrators. The death sentence was met with applause and tears in the courtroom.

“It pacified us a bit,” Abdur Rab, the father of one victim, told Reuters. “But we will be fully content when we see the hangman’s rope around her neck.”

India, which also has the death penalty, adopted a neutral stance, noting the verdict and vowing to “engage constructively with all stakeholders.”

Hasina’s family has praised New Delhi for giving her refuge. “India has always been a good friend,” Hasina’s son, Sajeeb Wazed, told local news agency ANI. “In the crisis, India has essentially saved my mother’s life.”

For more than a decade, Hasina was one of India’s most steadfast regional allies. Her government was instrumental in cracking down on anti-India insurgent groups that used Bangladeshi territory as a safe haven.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi had previously lauded Hasina for keeping their countries’ extensive border secure. Now her government’s downfall has raised significant security concerns in New Delhi that radical Islamist groups could re-emerge.

Anil Trigunayat, an Indian diplomat who has served in Bangladesh, said he “doubts very much” that New Delhi will send Hasina home to face prison or death.

The former leader has rejected the allegations against her as a political witch hunt, allowing India to make a potential case that the charges against her were politically motivated.

India’s extradition law, as well as its extradition treaty with Bangladesh, contains a “political offense” exception, designed for situations like this, allowing a state to refuse extradition if the crime is political in nature.

“India will have to look at it (as a) political crime, not the crimes against humanity for which she has been charged there,” he said.

But Trigunayat noted that Hasina hasn’t exhausted all legal remedies. She can appeal the verdict in Bangladesh’s Supreme Court, then potentially the International Criminal Court in The Hague, he said.

“Since not all the remedies are exhausted, India would not be in a rush to send her,” Trigunayat said.

The day Hasina was sentenced, Bangladesh’s foreign ministry called on India to hand her over “without delay.”

“This is India’s responsibility in keeping with the existing bilateral extradition treaty between both countries,” the ministry said.

Hasina’s death sentence sets a tense stage for Bangladesh’s elections planned for next February.

With her Awami League now banned and its leadership scattered, the interim government led by former Nobel peace laureate Muhammad Yunus faces the monumental task of steering the nation out of its deeply polarized political culture.

The Awami League’s absence leaves the political field open for its chief rival, Zia’s Bangladesh Nationalist Party, and dozens of other smaller parties, to contest any future election, though experts warn the deep-seated divisions may not be easily resolved.

“Bangladesh is far from reconciliation at this stage,” said the political scientist Hasan.

He says the Awami League may attempt to stage a political comeback, albeit not under Hasina’s leadership.

The question now is whether Hasina’s demise marks the end of a toxic era, or simply the beginning of a new chapter of uncertainty.