In a recent development, the Awami League, the ruling political party of Bangladesh, has voiced its strong condemnation against the six-month prison sentence handed down to former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. This sentence, issued by the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) on July 2, 2025, for contempt of court charges, has ignited a wave of protests within the party and across the nation. The Awami League has labeled the sentence as “unlawful and unconstitutional” and a result of a “false and farcical case.”

Background of the Case

The case revolves around an alleged phone conversation involving Sheikh Hasina, where she is accused of interfering with the judicial process and threatening the tribunal. The accusation stems from a viral audio clip that was shared widely on social media. In response to these allegations, the tribunal in Bangladesh filed charges of contempt of court against Sheikh Hasina, who is the daughter of the Father of the Nation, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.

In addition to Hasina, Shakil Akanda Bulbul, a prominent leader of the Awami League’s student wing, Chhatra League, was also sentenced to two months in jail in connection with the same case. The charges against both Hasina and Bulbul were based on the contents of the audio clip, but the Awami League asserts that the tribunal’s actions have been politically motivated and unjust.

Awami League’s Reactions and Criticisms

In its statement, the Awami League condemned the court’s decision, labeling it as a blatant violation of Bangladesh’s judicial process. The party highlighted that the ICT, which issued the sentence, is a part of what it considers an “illegitimate and unconstitutional interim militant regime.” The statement further criticized the tribunal for issuing such a one-sided verdict without following the established norms of law and justice. The Awami League argued that the tribunal did not offer Hasina a chance to defend herself and instead, made an arbitrary decision.

“This so-called tribunal has trampled over the rule of law, making a mockery of the judicial process and undermining the principles of justice. Such actions have no precedent in Bangladesh’s judicial history,” said the Awami League in its official statement.

The party went on to describe the tribunal’s decision as an example of “judicial terrorism” and compared it to the infamous “Kangaroo Court” model, where the judicial process is manipulated to suit political agendas. The Awami League believes that the ruling faction, under the leadership of Yunus, is abusing judicial authority to target political opponents and maintain control over the country.

Allegations Against the ICT and Legal Process

The controversy surrounding this ruling has raised serious questions about Bangladesh’s criminal justice system. The Awami League pointed out that the principles of criminal justice require that no individual can be declared guilty unless the crime is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This is one of the most fundamental aspects of Bangladesh’s penal law, and the party claims that Hasina was not given a fair chance to present her defense.

According to the Awami League, the tribunal did not allow legal counsel representing Sheikh Hasina to present arguments on her behalf. Instead, it allegedly gave an order for Hasina to appear before the tribunal by May 25, despite the fact that she was abroad at the time. The Awami League asserts that this decision was made without proper hearings, and the six-month sentence was imposed in less than a month, further fueling accusations of judicial misconduct.

The Awami League has questioned the legitimacy of the tribunal, emphasizing that the decision to prosecute Hasina was not based on any concrete evidence but rather on politically charged allegations. “The tribunal acted with unprecedented haste and without adhering to the principles of justice,” the party remarked, accusing the ruling faction of misusing the judicial system for political gains.

Political Context and National Implications

The Awami League has stressed that this case is part of a broader pattern of political violence and judicial manipulation in Bangladesh. The party alleges that under the leadership of Yunus and his militant faction, the country is witnessing a systematic effort to stifle political opposition and undermine the rule of law. The Awami League believes that the country is heading toward a path of destruction due to these practices, and it has called on all conscientious citizens to rise against such injustices.

The sentencing of Sheikh Hasina has created a significant political rift in Bangladesh, with many opposition groups also joining the Awami League’s protests. The party is urging global bodies and the international community to take a stand against the growing political repression in Bangladesh. The Awami League believes that this case is emblematic of the authoritarian tendencies that have taken root in the country.

Public Outcry and the Future of Bangladesh’s Democracy

The sentencing of Sheikh Hasina has sparked widespread public outcry, with many citizens expressing their dissatisfaction with the state of democracy and justice in the country. The Awami League’s call for global intervention and the citizens’ growing frustration point to a broader trend of increasing political unrest. Many political observers believe that the ruling faction’s actions are leading to an erosion of democratic norms, which could have long-term consequences for Bangladesh’s political stability.

The situation has become a flashpoint for discussions on the state of human rights, judicial independence, and the rule of law in Bangladesh. As the case continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how the international community will respond and whether Bangladesh’s democratic institutions can withstand these challenges.

The sentencing of Sheikh Hasina to six months in prison has raised important questions about Bangladesh’s legal and political systems. The Awami League’s strong opposition to this decision reflects a broader discontent with the current regime’s handling of the judiciary and political opposition. This controversy also highlights the deepening political divide in Bangladesh, as the ruling faction and opposition forces engage in a battle for power and influence.

As the case progresses, the eyes of the world will be on Bangladesh to see how the government and judiciary handle the allegations of political manipulation and judicial overreach. The future of democracy and rule of law in Bangladesh depends on the ability of the country’s institutions to uphold justice and fairness, and this case could be a defining moment in the nation’s political history.