Bangladesh has formally requested the extradition of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina from India under the 2013 bilateral extradition treaty, which explicitly permits New Delhi to decline any request it deems politically motivated or not made in good faith, according to a detailed report by the Asia Times. Hasina's own announcement that she plans to return voluntarily to Bangladesh by December has not simplified the matter — it has, if anything, sharpened the legal and diplomatic stakes for India.

Hasina's Stated Plan to Return

In a significant shift, Sheikh Hasina has declared her intention to travel back to Bangladesh alongside senior Awami League colleagues — including a former Home Minister who himself faces a death sentence — to surrender voluntarily and present her record before the country directly, rather than allow a verdict reached in her absence to stand unchallenged.

According to the Asia Times report, this move 'turns what might have been a closed legal chapter back into a live political question, and reopens a harder one underneath it: What happens when the institution built to deliver justice is compromised before the trial even begins.'

The ICT Trial: Procedural Concerns

In November 2024, Bangladesh's International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) sentenced Hasina and former Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal to death in absentia for crimes against humanity linked to demonstrations in July–August 2024. The trial has drawn scrutiny on multiple procedural grounds.

The report notes that the interim government led by Muhammad Yunus — described as 'unelected' — amended the tribunal's founding statute four times through executive ordinance while governing without a functioning Parliament, despite the constitution requiring parliamentary ratification, approval that, according to the report, 'never came and could not come.'

The tribunal's bench was reportedly reconstituted with judges who had not attained the legally required rank, following the earlier removal of the country's chief justice and other senior judges. The prosecution's central evidence — leaked surveillance recordings — was admitted without any hearing on how it was obtained or whether the method was lawful, the report stated.

Critically, the trial moved from the appointment of defence counsel to a death sentence in under five months. The United Nations own fact-finding mission, examining the same 2024 events, reportedly concluded that the evidence 'did not yet support individual criminal conviction.'

India's Legal Position Under the 2013 Treaty

The 2013 India-Bangladesh extradition treaty provides New Delhi with clear grounds to decline a request it views as politically motivated or insufficiently grounded in good faith. The Asia Times report argues that India does not need to take a position on Bangladesh's internal political disputes — it only needs to examine how the ICT was constituted and whether a conviction delivered under such circumstances meets the treaty's threshold for cooperation.

'That is a legal judgment, not a partisan one, and it can be made without endorsing or condemning anyone's conduct in the events of 2024,' the report noted.

What Comes Next

Hasina's December timeline, if she follows through, would force a resolution on multiple fronts simultaneously: India's response to the extradition request, the legal standing of the ICT's proceedings, and the broader question of political transition in Bangladesh. Diplomatic observers will be watching whether New Delhi formally responds to Dhaka's extradition request before or after that deadline.