As Bangladesh seeks extradition of ousted leader Sheikh Hasina, will India honour its obligations under their extradition treaty?

In recent news, the interim head of Bangladesh, Muhammad Yunus, has announced that the government will seek extradition of the former prime minister Sheikh Hasina from India. Haisna’s uninterrupted autocratic 15-year rule came to an end after mass anti-government protests in Bangladesh earlier this year, in which more than 1000 people were killed and several injured. She fled to India in August this year, marking a dramatic exit to her tenure, marred by accusations of grave human rights violations, a clampdown on dissent, extrajudicial killings and political victimisation of opponents.  

Hasina Wajid’s extradition request to India is sought by the interim government in relation to the arrest warrant issued by the Bangladesh International Crime Tribunal (ICT), which, ironically, was established by the former prime minister in 2010. The ICT has issued arrest warrants for the former premier and other key political figures in relation to alleged enforced disappearances, crimes against humanity and involvement in mass killings during protests that erupted earlier this year.  

The extradition treaty

The former premier’s extradition request to India is governed by the provisions of the India and Bangladesh extradition treaty 2013, which was amended in 2016. The treaty lists conditions and crimes for extradition. Both countries are obligated to extradite fugitives ‘who have been proceeded against’ or ‘who have been charged with or have been found guilty of or are wanted for’ crimes listed in the treaty as an ‘extraditable offence’.  An ‘extraditable offence’ must carry a minimum of one-year imprisonment. Further, the principle of dual criminality requires that the offence for which extradition is requested should be punishable in both countries. The charges against the former prime minister can be prosecuted in India, so this ground is satisfied.  

The only exceptions which may be invoked by India to refuse the extradition request are set out in Article 6 and 8 of the treaty. Article 6 limits enforcement where the charges are ‘political in nature’. Article 6 lists several offences, such as murder, terrorism-related crimes and kidnapping, which are excluded from being categorised as political offences. Despite being a politician, it is unlikely that India will be able to deny extradition on the basis that the charges against Hasina Wajid are of a political nature, as they include murder and enforced disappearances. 

Other exceptions are mentioned in Article 8 of the treaty, which states that an extradition request can be denied if it has ‘not been made in good faith’ and is not ‘in the interests of justice’. India may, in view of Hasina’s close family and personal ties to the country, exercise the exceptions in Article 8, but this will come at a cost of perhaps alienating the non-Awami league government and the people of Bangladesh. 

This diplomatic-legal dilemma appears unlikely to be resolved in the near future, given the silence of the Indian authorities on ‘Hasina’s extradition’ and tacit posturing of the former premier being a ‘state guest’.