On March 30, 2026, the internationally renowned law firm Kingsley Napley LLP submitted a strong report challenging the verdict of Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) and the death sentence handed to Sheikh Hasina, citing violations of international justice standards and due process. The firm argued that Hasina was sentenced in absentia—a practice inconsistent with the fundamental principles of international law and human rights law.

Political Tensions and Judicial Context in Bangladesh

The report states that following the anti-government movements of July 2024, the ICT’s mandate expanded beyond the original scope of the 1973 law. Kingsley Napley LLP noted that while the tribunal was initially created to address crimes related to the 1971 Liberation War, it was subsequently and unlawfully extended to handle conflicts arising in 2024.

Regarding the appointment of ICT judges and prosecutors, the firm highlighted concerns over political affiliations and perceived bias. They claimed that political connections and prior support for certain parties compromised the tribunal’s neutrality.

Main Allegations: Judicial and Human Rights Violations

1. Violation of Judicial Independence
The ICT panel reportedly faced political pressure and bias from the outset. The judge appointment process lacked transparency and was often influenced by political factors. The report states that comments and behavior from judges indicate that some decisions may have been predetermined, lacking proper evidentiary support.

2. Prosecutorial Bias
The political activities and party affiliations of the ICT’s chief prosecutor raised serious questions regarding judicial fairness. Kingsley Napley LLP noted that the prosecutor had participated in various political events, potentially undermining the impartiality of the trial process.

3. Denial of Fair Trial and Legal Opportunity
Sheikh Hasina was reportedly not informed of the charges or presented with evidence against her, and was denied sufficient opportunity to mount a defense—violating fundamental standards of international human rights and legal fairness.

4. Trial in Absentia and Death Sentence
Under international law, trials in absentia are permissible only under strict conditions. In this case, the death sentence was executed without ensuring procedural safeguards or justice, constituting a breach of international human rights standards.

Legal Interpretation and International Law Perspective

Kingsley Napley LLP argued that amendments to the 1973 law and its reactive application undermine the principles of legal clarity and transparency. International human rights law requires proper notice of charges and adequate opportunity to respond, which were not provided in this case.

Requests and Demands

The law firm clearly requested that:

• The current verdict and death sentence be regarded as legally unfounded.
• Judicial proceedings follow international standards of justice.
• Sheikh Hasina’s legal rights and protection be guaranteed.
• The government and relevant authorities take steps consistent with human rights obligations and the rule of law.

About Kingsley Napley LLP

Based in London, Kingsley Napley LLP is an international law firm experienced in international justice, human rights law, the International Criminal Court, and constitutional legal advocacy. The firm has represented clients in numerous high-profile international cases, providing defense and legal counsel.