Former Prime Minister Sentenced in Corruption Case

On Monday, a special court in Dhaka, Bangladesh, imposed a 10-year prison sentence on former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina for two corruption charges. The court also punished several of her relatives, including two nieces and a nephew, who faced related allegations.

Sheikh Hasina, who is now 78, had resigned and fled to India in August 2024 amid severe protests against her government—protests that resulted in over 300 fatalities, with at least 90 people killed when they stormed her official residence as she left office. She had been the country’s prime minister since 2009, making her tenure the longest in Bangladesh’s history. Hasina later claimed the U.S. orchestrated her removal, suggesting this was due to her refusal to cede control of a strategic island in the Bay of Bengal.

The protests began when students took to the streets, opposing a complicated quota system intended to benefit “freedom fighters” from the country’s fight for independence in the 1970s. Over time, as the original fighters aged, the system shifted to favor their descendants, stirring allegations of nepotism and corruption.

Demonstrators flagged Hasina as authoritarian, but countered her narrative with a harsh crackdown that included an internet blackout—an action reminiscent of tactics employed by some regimes elsewhere in the world. In October 2025, an interim government is set to be established, though Hasina’s Awami League party remains one of Bangladesh’s prominent political entities post-ouster.

In a separate verdict in November 2025, a war crimes tribunal sentenced Hasina to death in absentia for her role in the deaths of around 1,400 protesters. Speaking from her refuge in India, she labeled the ruling as a farcical outcome orchestrated by a “kangaroo court.”

The recent verdict stems from a complaint by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), which accused Hasina and her family of misusing government authority to manipulate the sale of several land parcels. These plots were meant to facilitate a housing project that includes more than 25,000 residential units. The accused have dismissed the charges as politically motivated.

In this recent court session, Hasina received sentences of five years for each of the two cases, both linked to land dealings. Her nephew, Radwan Mujib Siddique, and niece, Azmina Siddique, were sentenced to seven years, while Tulip Siddique—a niece and UK member of Parliament—was given four years. Other family members received shorter sentences along with fines.

This case has international implications; Tulip Siddique’s position in the UK adds a layer of complexity. She and Hasina were previously sentenced to four years for an earlier matter connected to the housing project. In total, Hasina faces 26 years in prison across earlier convictions.

On the same day, the British government called for the immediate arrest and extradition of Tulip and her relatives in light of their convictions. The Labour Party criticized the verdict, arguing that Tulip Siddique hasn’t had a fair legal process and has been denied the specifics of the allegations against her.

Bangladesh is gearing up for its first election since Hasina’s departure in February. With the Awami League barred from participating, the main contenders appear to be the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and Jamaat-e-Islami (JIB). Strikingly, the BNP has criticized Hasina for being too allied with India, while JIB historically opposed Bangladesh’s independence from Pakistan. This political shift might sway allegiances away from India toward Pakistan and China, despite India’s apparent preference for a BNP-led government.

Sheikh Hasina’s son, Sajeeb Ahmed Joy, urged citizens to boycott what he labeled a “fraudulent” election. He expressed concern over widespread violence, claiming that many members of the Awami League and police suffered as a result, despite their party not currently holding power.

Joy accused the U.S. of secretly backing the BNP, alleging that extremist groups were meddling in the electoral process. He also raised concerns that mail-in voting could be manipulated to affect the election’s outcome.