What are the legal aspects Sheikh Hasina's extradition process ?

In a Reuters interview on 10 July, Sheikh Hasina, convicted of crimes against humanity and in hiding, expressed her interest in ‘returning’ to Bangladesh in December. Although Sheikh Hasina described this as 'returning home' and said she would 'return to surrender,' neither the legal nor the real situation applies in this case.

Since she has been sheltered in India since her flight from Bangladesh on on 5 August 2024, and due to the prisoner exchange and extradition agreement between Bangladesh and India regarding convicted criminals, Hasina’s 'arrival' in Bangladesh is supposed to be determined by that law.

Secondly, since she has already been convicted by the court, she did not appeal, and she has not been granted any kind of bail, the law enforcement agencies are obligated to arrest her if found within the country.

There are two aspects to discussing Sheikh Hasina's announcement—legal and political. The legal aspect involves the extradition agreement signed between Bangladesh and India in 2013 and amended in 2016. Referring to this agreement, the interim government of Bangladesh has repeatedly requested Hasina’s extradition since 2024, and in December 2024, the government sent a note verbale to this effect. While India acknowledged receipt of that note verbale, it did not make any comment on the matter.

After the International Crimes Tribunal awarded the death penalty to Hasina on 17 November 2025, Bangladesh officially requested India for extradition. It is worth recalling that after the tribunal’s verdict, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs stated in a notice that they were aware of the verdict. However, it was notable that the statement contained quotation marks around the International Crimes Tribunal, indicating India's stance.

In April of this year, after forming a new government, Bangladesh’s Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman raised the matter during his visit to New Delhi. Subsequently, on 17 April, during the weekly briefing of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said, "The request is being reviewed as part of the ongoing judicial and domestic legal process" (Bdnews24, 17 April 2026).

Although Jaiswal did not give a direct answer regarding Hasina's recent statement, he said that India’s attitude towards Sheikh Hasina has not changed. He stated, "Any extradition is a legal matter. It will be resolved through the legal process" (Prothom Alo, 14 July 2026). This indicates that what will happen with Sheikh Hasina, who is sheltered in India, is not dependent on her personal will. India has repeatedly stated it has provided 'temporary' asylum to the former prime minister of Bangladesh considering her protection and security in a specific situation.

Therefore, there is no rationale to think that Hasina will be able to decide on this matter alone. Notably, both Bangladesh and India agree that the law will take precedence in this matter. The relevant legal provisions are the extradition treaty between Bangladesh and India and India’s 1962 Extradition Act. For extradition under this treaty, there is a need to advance step by step, and broadly, there are six key steps:

The extradition process begins with the requesting state proving that the committed crime is an 'extraditable offence' under the treaty. According to Article 2(1) of the treaty, the offence must fulfill the 'dual criminality' principle, meaning the criminal conduct for which extradition is requested must be considered a crime under the laws of both Bangladesh and India, and each must prescribe at least a one-year jail term. Any linguistic or statutory classification differences will not bar extradition [Article 2(3)].

In cases where the individual is already convicted, Bangladesh must have a valid sentence and evidence of conviction by a competent court. In Hasina’s case, the International Crimes Tribunal has issued an arrest warrant and subsequently conducted a trial in absentia, sentencing her to death.

Once the legal basis is established, Bangladesh must prepare a formal extradition request in accordance with the provisions of Article 10 of the treaty. This request will be sent by the Bangladesh Ministry of Home Affairs to the Indian Ministry of External Affairs via diplomatic channels. According to Article 4 and Article 10(1) of the treaty, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs is the ''central authority'' responsible for processing this extradition request.

The request must include the following documents as stipulated by Article 10(2) of the treaty:

*An accurate description and identification-related information of Sheikh Hasina;

*Description of the material facts of the alleged offences;

*Statutory legal provisions that constituted the said offences; and prescriptions of applicable penalties.

Since the purpose of extradition here is not for trial but rather to execute an existing judgment, Bangladesh is also required to provide the following documents under Article 10(4):

*A certified copy or certificate of conviction and imposed punishment;

*A clear declaration that the judgment and punishment remain legally enforceable under Bangladesh law, specifying how much of the sentence remains to be served.

Before advancing to the next step, the attached judicial documents must be properly authenticated according to Article 13 of the treaty. The Indian Ministry of External Affairs will review whether the judgment, punishment, arrest warrant, and accompanying certificates have been properly authenticated and whether all procedural requirements under the treaty have been fulfilled.

Although the 2016 amendment abolished the requirement to establish a ''prima facie case'' through evidence submission under Article 10(3), this amendment principally applies to requests brought for trial. When extradition is requested to enforce a sentence, the obligation for additional supporting documents imposed by Article 10(4) does not fall away due to the amendment.

If the documents are incomplete or insufficient, India may seek supplementary information from Bangladesh under Article 10(5) before taking further action.

India must then determine whether there is any legal impediment to extradition:

*Political Offence: According to Article 6(1), if the offence is considered of a 'political nature,' extradition may be denied. However, Article 6(2) explicitly mentions that murder, culpable homicide, kidnapping, explosive offences, and serious terrorism-related offences cannot be classified as political offences.

*Good Faith: Pursuant to Article 8(1) of the treaty, if it appears that the prosecution was not initiated in good faith and in the interest of justice, India may refuse extradition.

*Constitutional and human rights obligations: Beyond the treaty, India has constitutional obligations under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. It has to consider whether extradition would result in torture, arbitrary deprivation of life, execution of the death sentence, or fundamentally unfair trials for the requested person.

Thus, before making any final decision, factors such as the imposition of the death penalty, conducting trials in absentia, and adherence to internationally accepted due process standards may be closely scrutinised.

Once the procedural requirements have been satisfied, the Indian government conducts a ‘substantive review’ in light of its internal Extradition Act, 1962, and the relevant treaty. The Indian Ministry of External Affairs considers whether the request fulfills India's internal legal criteria and whether there are any statutory or treaty-based grounds for denying extradition.

This step does not determine the guilt or innocence of the requested individual. Instead, the focus of the review remains on whether the treaty's procedural requirements have been met and whether extradition is legally permissible under Indian law.

Upon concluding the legal review, the Indian government will decide on whether to approve the extradition request.

If extradition is approved, under Article 16(1) of the treaty, Sheikh Hasina will be handed over to the Bangladeshi authorities at a mutually agreed-upon location within one month of receiving formal notification of the extradition being granted. If Bangladesh fails to remove her from India within this period without sufficient cause, India reserves the right to deny future extradition requests for the same offence (Article 16(2)).

After the transfer, Bangladesh is bound to adhere to the ‘principle of specialty’ under Article 12 of the treaty. This means Hasina can only be tried or punished for the offences for which extradition was granted, unless India later consents to additional offences. Additionally, except under circumstances expressly allowed by the treaty, Bangladesh cannot re-extradite her to a third country without India’s consent.

India shall follow the Extradition Act, 1962, when considering extradition. According to it, if India receives an extradition request for any person, the government shall appoint a magistrate who will examine the allegations, evidence, and related matters. In that case, Hasina will have to appear before the magistrate.

Since it is not mandatory for this to take place in an open court, how the magistrate will obtain her statement is not predetermined. If, upon considering the documents, the magistrate decides that the allegations would have been acceptable to an Indian court, he will issue a report to the central government. If the accused has any written statement, he may also attach it. Based on this, the Indian government will decide on extradition.

Bangladesh has followed the first two steps. How the other steps of the treaty will be followed is practically dependent on the will of the Indian government. Consequently, the timing and manner of implementing these specific procedural steps remain uncertain. These steps, under the Indian government’s discretion, also depend on politics and India-Bangladesh relations. India may refuse the request if it feels it was not initiated in the spirit of good faith or in the interest of justice, as described in Article 8(1) of the extradition treaty.

India is unlikely to make any decision in the near future. Doing so would not be politically favourable for India and would pose a direct and severe threat to the relationship between the two countries. It is also observed in cases involving other countries that the entire process often takes several years to complete. Therefore, India’s argument would be that it is doing nothing exceptional by taking its time on Hasina’s extradition.

#Ali Riaz is a former vice-chairman of the Interim Government’s National Consensus Commission and a Distinguished Professor in the Department of Politics and Government at Illinois State University, USA.

*The opinion is the writer's own.

* This article was published in the print edition of Prothom Alo on 1 August 2026, under the title ‘Review of the Legal Process for Sheikh Hasina’s Extradition’.

*This article, originally published in Prothom Alo print and online editions, has been rewritten in English by Rabiul Islam