Bangladesh: Sheikh Hasina Rejects Death Sentence, Calls Tribunal ‘Rigged’ And ‘Unconstitutional’ | World News

As the International Crimes Court verdict spread across Bangladesh, Dhaka trembled under the weight of uncertainty. The announcement that former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was sentenced to death penalty had a shocking effect in the country. Within a few hours, the party headquarters at 23 Bangabandhu Avenue issued a lengthy statement; this was the court’s first direct response since its controversial rulings.

Hasina’s words were defiant. Calmly but forcefully, he said, “the verdicts pronounced against me were made by a fraudulent tribunal formed and presided over by an unelected government with no democratic powers.” He insisted that the court was not a mechanism of justice but an instrument of political revenge designed to erase the Awami League from public life.

He reminded the nation that millions of people were living “under the chaotic, violent and socially reactionary rule of Dr. Muhammad Yunus.” In his telling, the interim government was not a savior but a usurper who presided over economic collapse, widespread repression, and unprecedented attacks on minorities and journalists. He claimed that attacks on his supporters continued unchecked and that extremists had gained a foothold in the administration.

Hasina flatly rejected the court’s demands. “I completely deny the accusations made against me,” he wrote, insisting that neither he nor other political leaders ordered the killings during the riots in July and August 2025. He argued that the Tribunal was neither international nor impartial; instead, “all senior judges and even senior lawyers who had previously expressed sympathy for the previous government were dismissed or intimidated into silence.”

His disappointment was also personal. He wrote that he “was not given a fair chance to defend himself in court” and was not even allowed to have lawyers of his own choosing represent him in absentia. He said the guilty verdict was predetermined.

Outside the political scene, Bangladesh was shaken by violence that broke out in the months before the decision. Government buildings were burned, police stations were looted, and protests turned into bloodshed. Hasina described a country where the constitutional order was falling apart under the new regime and “peaceful demonstrators were being shot dead.”

He acknowledged the tragedies of July and August but insisted they were misrepresented. He said that the situation was out of the control of the security forces, but that it was wrong to portray this as a planned attack on civilians. “We lost control of the situation,” he wrote, “but to characterize what happened as a pre-planned attack on citizens is to misread the facts.”

His response resulted not in resignation but in defiance. He stated his objection to the charges being heard before the International Criminal Court and reiterated his call for international oversight. He believed that the interim government resisted this “because it knew the ICC would acquit me.”

Controversies have flared up all over Bangladesh; A wronged leader fighting for democracy or a fallen prime minister shirking responsibility? Only one fact was certain: the nation was at a crossroads, its future uncertain and its past fiercely contested.