PTI
Dhaka
A leading British law firm has served a notice to Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal, challenging its fairness and legality in prosecuting and handing down a death sentence to deposed prime minister Sheikh Hasina after an “unfair and unlawful” trial.
According to sources linked to her now-banned Awami League and legal circle, London-based Kingsley Napley sent a notice to the special tribunal on Hasina’s behalf on Tuesday.
It sought a response within the next two weeks to its notice, which called the trial “unfair and unlawful.”
The law firm alleged that the trial took place in a politically hostile environment in 78-year-old Hasina’s absence, when punitive measures were taken against Awami League supporters, political violence was underway, lawyers were exposed to attacks and the party too was banned under an executive order by Muhammad Yunus’ then interim regime.
“Sheikh Hasina has been prosecuted and sentenced in absentia for capital offences in proceedings that… Violate her fundamental rights under international law,” the notice read.
The International Crimes Tribunal (ICT-BD) had sentenced Hasina to death on November 17 last year, finding her guilty of incitement, instigation, and ordering the killing of 1,400 people during a student-led violent street protest called the July Uprising that toppled her government on August 5, 2024.
The 10-page letter by the law firm alleged the tribunal lacked judicial independence, saying, “This correspondence (notice) does not constitute acceptance of, submission to, or recognition of the legitimacy of these proceedings as currently constituted”.
Alleging a lack of transparency in the appointment of the tribunal’s judges, the notice said the bench included politically affiliated individuals, undermining judicial independence, and noted that one of the judges had already indicated a pre-determined guilty verdict.
It presented as evidence of bias the political involvement of the then-chief prosecutor Tajul Islam and his anti-Awami League stance, alongside allegations of corruption within the prosecution team.
It said Hasina was denied access to evidence, charges, or the opportunity to defend herself, violating Article 14 of international treaties on civil and political rights.
Kingsley Napley, known for its work in criminal litigation, extradition, and white-collar crime, questioned the tribunal’s jurisdiction, noting that although it was originally established to try crimes committed during Bangladesh’s 1971 Liberation War, its powers have since been expanded, which they claim is unlawful.
The law firm said the tribunal’s jurisdiction was expanded to cover events in 2024, which went beyond the original intent of the law enabling the tribunal’s constitution.
It argued that through Hasina’s trial, it violated fundamental legal principles and that such allegations should have been tried in ordinary criminal courts.
The notice demanded Hasina’s conviction be annulled and a retrial be conducted according to international standards, and the safety of those associated with the Awami League be ensured.
The letter noted that international organisations like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the International Bar Association expressed concern over the matter.
The British law firm’s letter was sent nearly two months after fresh controversy gripped Hasina’s trial as an ICT-BD prosecutor alleged that the special tribunal’s now relieved chief prosecutor and a fellow lawyer were involved in a massive corruption over the trial.
ICT-BD prosecutor BM Sultan Mahmud on February 23 said the then chief prosecutor Tajul along with a fellow lawyer had formed a “syndicate” to turn the tribunal into a “money-making tool”.
Mahmud said a key accused in the case and former police chief Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun was made an ‘approver’ or state-witness to testify against the deposed premier in exchange for money.
Newly appointed ICT-BD chief prosecutor Amirul Islam said the alleged irregularities in Hasina’s prosecution process last year would be investigated.
“If errors or negligence are found and legal provisions allow, necessary steps will be taken,” he told reporters assuming the charge a day after Prime Minister Tarique Rahman’s new government relieved his predecessor, Tajul, who was appointed by Muhammad Yunus’ interim regime.
Hasina fled to India after her government was toppled in the student-led violent street protest on August 5, 2024 and has been charged with committing ‘crimes against humanity’ to tame the protesters.
Hasina and the then-home minister in her cabinet were handed down the death penalty after trial in absentia. Their trial process was completed in four months, starting from August 2025.
Several legal experts earlier expressed concerns about the trial’s fairness as it was carried out in haste without exhausting the due legal process, asserting that the witnesses and evidence produced were not corroborated as required.
The US-based Human Rights Watch (HWR) in a statement earlier alleged the process failed to meet international standards, while Amnesty International argued that sentencing a defendant to death in absentia was inherently “unjust” and contravenes the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
The International Crisis Group (ICG), a non-governmental organisation (NGO) that serves as an ‘early warning’ system for impending conflicts and provides policy analysis to decision-makers, noted that the “extreme speed of the hearings, combined with a lack of resources for the defense, undermined the credibility of the judicial reasoning”.
Hasina and Awami League earlier rejected the verdict, calling the trial the “fallout of vendetta” and the tribunal a “kangaroo court”.
