Hasina verdict deepens crisis

Are conditions right to hold elections in February 2026? You’ll hear it wherever you go in Bangladesh, and the question has acquired a bleeding edge ever since the country’s International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) pronounced its death sentence on deposed former prime minister Sheikh Hasina. There is also no indication when the temporary ban imposed on the Awami League in May 2025 will be lifted.

Sheikh Hasina, who took asylum in India, had meanwhile urged her supporters to boycott the election. Her appeal, through three separate interviews in October 2025 to global news outlets, has added to the political volatility.

It was widely pointed out by the media in Bangladesh that these interviews would have had the approval of the Indian government. While Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League’s reach to the people and the media remains severely restricted within Bangladesh, the Indian government has said no control is possible in the ‘age of social media’. She continues to wield influence online among Bangladesh’s substantial diaspora, bypassing the interim government’s attempts to silence dissent.

Currently, thousands of Awami League workers are in exile in India, planning ‘radical’ political action back home. The party’s publicity secretary Salim Mahmud, believed to be close to the deposed prime minister, admits that the party’s supporters engaged in violence and vandalism after the conviction.

“We have consciously decided to take a more radical stance which will result in deterioration of law and order all over Bangladesh in the next few weeks,” he asserts and claims that a significant section of the Bangladesh Army is sympathetic to their cause.

“Under the Biden administration, US–Bangladesh ties had taken a nosedive. There has been a complete reset since,” says Mahmud. He points to the 10-year roadmap signed by India and the US on 31 October as evidence that the two powers would support Bangladesh if martial law becomes necessary.

This may well be grandstanding but according to various accounts, the Awami League has already intensified its agitation, with reports of violence coming in from different parts of Bangladesh, including Dhaka. “Our struggle will continue…until Yunus resigns,” an Awami League communique declared.

The ICT verdict has been termed “biased and politically motivated” by Hasina and her party, which has been banned from contesting the February elections.

However, with the Awami League banned, the political tussle will be between Mohammad Yunus’ interim government — backed by the Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) and National Students’ Federation — and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). With Awami League hitting the streets, the prospect of holding elections in February 2026 appears to be receding.

The international reaction to Sheikh Hasina’s death sentence has been along predictable lines. While noting the conviction decided by a judicial process, questions have been raised on the in-absentia trial, the inadequate defence and insufficient evidence of Hasina’s direct involvement in ordering killings.

Then there is the issue of the interim government’s request to extradite Sheikh Hasina that has put India in a dilemma: accede to Dhaka’s demands and risk alienating a long-standing ally deeply engaged in countering regional security threats, or protect Hasina to preserve its strategic interests, particularly given her attention to India’s northeast.

Extraditing Sheikh Hasina will also mean emboldening Islamist factions within the Yunus administration, notably JeI, whose resurgence would threaten India’s border security and stir unrest amid upcoming elections in West Bengal and Assam, where migration from Bangladesh remains a contentious issue.

Experts point out that the India–Bangladesh extradition treaty allows for refusal if the offense is considered ‘political in nature’. India has so far been non-committal, stating that it has ‘noted the verdict’ and remains committed to peace, democracy and stability in Bangladesh.

In Bangladesh the BNP has been cautious in its response to the verdict. ‘It has ensured the establishment of justice and the rule of law. BNP affirms that it is firmly committed to establishing the rule of law and justice and urges the public to remain vigilant in this regard,’ it said in a press release.

BNP leaders have also been quite vocal about ending ‘India’s dadagiri’ if it secures power. Although the BNP is not barred from taking part in the elections, its relationship with the Yunus government is far from cordial. The party has expressed its displeasure through a series of dissent notes to the proposals of the National Consensus Commission tasked with political reforms in Bangladesh.

The BNP has opposed proposals for greater state transparency and checks and balances. It has argued that their own reform agenda has been sidelined and insists that voters should determine reforms through upcoming elections.

Critics accuse the BNP of obstructing democratic reforms, while the party accuses the interim government of engineering electoral conditions to favour its own hold on power.

Bangladesh’s current internal politics bears a striking resemblance to that of 1971. In the past few years, there have been allegations of state repression, extrajudicial killings and other human rights abuses. Groups that opposed the country’s liberation in 1971 are once again calling the shots.

If elections are held, India will inevitably become a key electoral issue with Bangladesh divided between pro-India and anti-India blocs. The handling of Hasina’s extradition request could tip the balance.

Balancing the old and the new Bangladesh will require both outstanding statesmanship and diplomatic skills on the part of New Delhi.

Sourabh Sen is a Kolkata-based independent writer and commentator on politics, human rights and foreign affairs. More of his writing may be read here