Hasina Sentenced to Death

The Bangladesh Case: Hasina Sentenced to Death 

In Bangladesh, the International Crimes Tribunal has sentenced ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to death in absentia for crimes against humanity, related to her government’s violent crackdown on a 2024 student-led uprising.  The tribunal found that she ordered lethal force, including use of drones, helicopters, and other weapons, and failed to prevent mass killings. Reportedly up to 1,400 people may have been killed, according to UN-linked estimates.  Hasina, who is now in India, has strongly rejected the verdict, calling it “biased and politically motivated.”  Her conviction comes just ahead of a February 2026 parliamentary election, and the political tension in Bangladesh is very high. 

 

The Nepal Situation: Instability, Youth Uprising, and Institutional Crisis 

In Nepal, 2025 has been marked by deep political instability and major youth-led protests. A key flashpoint was the government’s ban on 26 social media platforms (Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp, etc.), which led to “Gen Z” protests charging corruption, lack of transparency, and elite nepotism.  The protests escalated, leading to violent confrontations, the storming of parliament, and many casualties. 

Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli eventually resigned.  An interim government led by former Chief Justice Sushila Karki was formed, and new elections are scheduled for March 2026.  Politically, Nepal’s system is very fragmented — longstanding parties are deeply divided, and there is a strong sentiment among youth that the political elite have failed them.  There is also a rising pro-monarchy movement, adding another layer of uncertainty.  

 

Comparison and Analysis 

Nature of Crisis 

In Bangladesh, the crisis is judicial and retributive: a formal tribunal has handed down a death sentence for crimes against humanity. This is an extreme, institutionalized form of political reckoning. 

In Nepal, the crisis is more about governance breakdown, public protest, and political legitimacy. There’s no death sentence or mass atrocity trial, but rather a revolt against corruption, suppression, and unresponsive elites. 

Leadership Accountability 

Hasina’s case shows accountability through a court, albeit one that critics say is politically motivated. The verdict is highly symbolic, signaling that even powerful former leaders may face severe consequences. 

In Nepal, accountability is emerging from popular mobilization, especially among young people. Their demands are less about punishing a single leader and more about systemic change (anti-corruption, democratization, reform). 

Political Stability 

Bangladesh’s verdict could deepen polarization. A death sentence is dramatic and could lead to unrest, especially around the upcoming election. 

Nepal’s cycle of instability is structural: frequent government changes, fragile coalitions, and lack of institutional trust. The Gen Z protests reflect long-term frustration, not just a one-off crisis. 

Democratic Legitimacy and Rule of Law 

The tribunal in Bangladesh raises questions about due process: Hasina was tried in absentia, and some argue the tribunal lacks independence. (Dawn) 

In Nepal, the challenge is different: democratic institutions exist, but their legitimacy is questioned. The protests highlight a deep disconnect between formal democracy and how people — especially young people — feel governed. 

Future Risks and Opportunities 

For Bangladesh, this verdict could lead to further political instability, potential violence, or even international backlash, depending on how it’s enforced and how Hasina’s supporters react. 

For Nepal, the energy from the youth uprising could be a turning point. If performed  well, it could strengthen democratic reform. But the risk is that interim government and traditional elites may co-opt or suppress that momentum, returning to old patterns. 

 Conclusion 

While both Bangladesh and Nepal are facing serious political turmoil, the nature and dynamics of their crises are quite different. Bangladesh’s case is a dramatic, legalistic reckoning with a former leader, encapsulating justice, power, and retribution. Nepal’s crisis, in contrast, is more about structural democratic failure, generational disillusionment, and grassroots demands for systemic reform. 

In Bangladesh, the death sentence is a symbol of how high the stakes are. In Nepal, the protests and leadership change represent a more open-ended struggle — one that could either deepen democratic governance or slide back into instability, depending on how its institutions respond.