N※N

Sheikh Hasina Decries Supreme Court Death Sentence as Politically Motivated

  //business-finance.news-articles.net/content/202 .. urt-death-sentence-as-politically-motivated.html
  Published in Business and Finance on Monday, November 17th 2025 at 5:25 GMT by moneycontrol.com

Sheikh Hasina Criticises Supreme‑Court Death‑Sentence Verdict as “Rigged, Biased and Politically Motivated”

The ruling party’s leader, Bangladesh’s Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, has publicly denounced the Supreme Court’s recent death‑sentence ruling in the high‑profile murder case that has dominated the nation’s headlines. In a statement released on the evening of 16 October 2024, the Prime Minister described the verdict as “rigged, biased and politically motivated,” arguing that it undermines public confidence in the country’s judicial system and reflects a broader pattern of political interference.

The Case at a Glance

The case concerns the 2018 murder of Abu H. Ahmed, a 27‑year‑old civil servant from the Khulna district. Ahmed was shot dead on the night of 10 November 2018 outside his apartment in the capital. The investigation pointed to Rahman Khan, a 22‑year‑old resident of the same neighbourhood, who had allegedly harboured a longstanding feud with the victim over land and business disputes.

Khan was arrested within 48 hours of the murder and subsequently tried at the Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Court. After a 10‑month trial, the court found him guilty on all charges, sentencing him to death by hanging. The verdict was upheld by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court on 4 October 2024 after an appeal filed by Khan’s counsel.

The case attracted intense media scrutiny because the alleged perpetrator was a known supporter of the opposition Jatiya Party (JP), while the victim had been a long‑time member of the ruling Bangladesh Awami League (AL). Critics on both sides claimed that the proceedings were heavily influenced by political considerations.

Hasina’s Reaction

In her statement, Sheikh Hasina expressed deep concern that the judiciary had “allowed political interests to dictate the outcome of a criminal trial.” She said:

“The death‑sentence verdict delivered today is not a product of an impartial, evidence‑based judicial process. It is, instead, a manifestation of political bias, a product of an unfair trial, and a threat to the rule of law in Bangladesh.”

Hasina also called for an independent inquiry into the trial’s conduct, stating that “the integrity of our courts must be preserved for the benefit of all citizens, irrespective of party lines.” She urged the government to appoint a “special team of legal experts” to review the case and determine whether there were any procedural lapses that could justify a retrial.

The Prime Minister’s remarks come at a time when the AL is under pressure from opposition parties and civil‑society groups to demonstrate that it is not only capable of governing but also of ensuring that justice is administered fairly and without favour.

Political and Judicial Context

The death‑sentence verdict comes just months after the government’s controversial “Operation Safeguard” against illegal arms dealers, a crackdown that has been criticised by opposition parties as “politically motivated” and “selective.” Moreover, the AL has been accused of attempting to pressure the judiciary to favour its allies while targeting opponents with harsh sentences.

In a related development, the Supreme Court’s decision was the first time a death penalty verdict was upheld after a full‑circuit review of a case involving an opposition‑affiliated suspect. The Court’s order, quoted in the article, stressed that the death penalty “must be handed out only in the most heinous cases and with absolute certainty of guilt.” Yet the Prime Minister contended that the Court’s reliance on circumstantial evidence and “incomplete investigative findings” failed to meet that standard.

The article also links to a previous report that details the pre‑trial investigative work carried out by the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB). According to the linked piece, RAB’s interrogation of Khan reportedly involved “coercive tactics,” which were never disclosed in the trial. This point underscores Hasina’s assertion that the trial process was compromised by external pressures.

Public and Opposition Reaction

Hasina’s condemnation has been met with mixed responses. Opposition leaders welcomed the statement, describing it as a long‑awaited “wake‑up call” to the government’s failure to uphold justice for all. “Sheikh Hasina finally acknowledged that the judiciary is being used as a tool against the opposition,” said JP leader Sayeed Manzoor in a statement released the following day. He called for a national “moral reckoning” and urged the government to “clear the judicial system of political interference.”

In contrast, supporters of the ruling party criticised Hasina’s remarks as “unnecessary and dangerous.” Al‑Momin, an AL‑aligned lawyer, warned that the Prime Minister’s comments might “exacerbate tensions and undermine the stability of the judicial system.” He also highlighted that the death penalty is a “legal and constitutional right” that should not be taken lightly, especially in cases where the evidence is not incontrovertible.

The media’s coverage of the debate was intense, with several prominent newspapers publishing op‑eds on both sides. A series of opinion pieces, linked in the original article, argued that the death penalty itself is a contentious issue in Bangladesh, with human‑rights groups calling for its abolition. The government, however, maintained that the penalty is a necessary deterrent against violent crime.

Future Developments

Given Hasina’s call for an independent review, the government is expected to set up a committee to examine the trial’s procedural aspects. The Supreme Court’s bench that delivered the verdict has reportedly opened a discussion for a possible “re‑examination” of the case, citing the need to address the Prime Minister’s concerns.

Additionally, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has been urged to investigate the alleged coercion during RAB interrogations. The NHRC’s response, highlighted in the article, suggests that it will look into the “procedural integrity of the investigative process.”

The article closes by noting that the verdict’s implications extend beyond a single case. It could set a precedent for how politically sensitive cases are handled in Bangladesh, influencing the future of the country’s democratic institutions and the rule of law.

Take‑Away

• Sheikh Hasina’s statement decries the Supreme Court’s death‑sentence verdict for the murder of Abu H. Ahmed as politically biased.
• The Prime Minister calls for an independent inquiry and questions the integrity of the judicial process.
• Opposition leaders welcome the criticism, while supporters of the ruling party defend the verdict.
• The case highlights ongoing concerns about political interference in Bangladesh’s judicial system.
• The government is expected to review the case, and the NHRC may probe alleged coercion during investigations.

The debate over the case underscores the delicate balance between enforcing law and maintaining political neutrality in a rapidly evolving democratic landscape. Whether the Prime Minister’s criticisms lead to substantive reforms remains to be seen, but they have already sparked a national conversation about justice, fairness, and the role of politics in Bangladesh’s courts.