ARTICLE AD BOX
- Home
- Latest News
- Markets
- News
- Premium
- Companies
- Money
- Excelsoft Technologies IPO
- Chennai Gold Rate
- Technology
- Mint Hindi
- In Charts
Copyright © HT Digital Streams Limited
All Rights Reserved.
Summary
It is difficult to see India handing over Sheikh Hasina to Muhammad Yunus, who has forged connections with the anti-India axis of China, Pakistan, and Turkey rather than endearing himself to New Delhi.
NEW DELHI : The sentencing of former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to death by the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) for crimes against humanity during the July 2024 uprising—which left nearly 1,400 protesters dead, mostly students, and ended her 15-year rule—is deeply ironic.
For one, the ICT was set up in 1973 by her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rehman, to detect and punish those responsible for genocide during the 1971 Liberation War, especially between 25 March and 16 December 1971. The Dhaka tribunal was revived in 2009 by Hasina after her Awami League won the December 2008 elections to punish the assassins of her father and other family members in 1975.
Second, in June 2024, Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus and 13 others were found guilty of embezzling $2 million from their company’s workers’ welfare fund. Since Hasina was still in power, the cases were widely seen as a political witch hunt. However, just days after her ouster and Yunus’s swearing-in as head of the interim government, the courts acquitted him.
Now the proverbial shoe is on the other foot—it's Yunus who is seen to be acting out of political spite.
Of course, Hasina must take responsibility for the deaths during the 2024 protests. Yet the death penalty seems excessive. Having served only fifteen months in office, Yunus would be keen to demonstrate that justice has been served and that the mighty have nowhere to hide. But one can't help but wonder if this is merely because he has little else to show for his achievements?
Yunus’s extensive reform agenda—he established 11 commissions to propose changes in the electoral system, judiciary, and police—has achieved limited progress. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) projected real GDP growth in 2025 at 3.8%, well below the 6% average before the ‘Monsoon Revolution’. Overall, the expectations raised by Hasina’s ouster have largely remained unmet.
Now, Yunus is seeking to secure her extradition from India under the 2013 treaty. But does the treaty obligate New Delhi to extradite her?
There is a question mark over the legitimacy of the ICT verdict—wouldn’t it have been better if Yunus left it to an elected government to administer justice? After all, the country is expected to go to the polls in February 2026.
If a formal request is submitted, New Delhi could cite the ‘political’ nature of the request and deny extradition, well within the provisions of Article 6(1). However, Bangladesh could invoke Article 6(2), which states that if the offence is murder or incitement to murder, it cannot be considered ‘political’. This leaves room for protracted legal proceedings.
India could also refuse extradition if the accused, Hasina, convinces New Delhi that the charges are ‘unjust or oppressive’ or ‘not made in good faith in the interests of justice’.
Should the extradition request proceed through India’s legal process, it is anybody’s guess how long it might take. Vijay Mallya, Lalit Modi, and Nirav Modi continue to evade arrest.
But more importantly, it is difficult to see India obliging Yunus, who, rather than endearing himself to New Delhi, has forged connections with the anti-India axis of China, Pakistan, and Turkey. Add to that his stance on the treatment of Hindus, his remarks about India’s landlocked North-East, his description of Bangladesh as the 'guardian' of the ocean, and his allowing space for the Pakistan-linked Islamist group Jamaat-e-Islami to grow—the list is long.
Meanwhile, India is hosting another Taliban minister
Alhaj Nooruddin Azizi is on a five-day visit to New Delhi—about a month after his colleague, foreign minister Mawlawi Amir Khan Muttaqi, came to India—with a business delegation. It comes amid escalating tensions with one-time staunch ally Pakistan, affecting Afghanistan's exports, usually routed through the Karachi port.
It makes sense, then, that Afghanistan is reaching out to India, a major market for Afghan commodities. India is also helping in the development of Iran’s Chabahar Port, which provides Afghanistan with an alternative route to export goods.
New Delhi is hosting Taliban ministers as state guests, following the logic that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Pakistan’s Field Marshal Asim Munir has openly described his country as a ‘dump truck barreling toward a shiny Mercedes’—India—with the aim of causing maximum harm.
Well, India does need to buy insurance, right? Increasing economic dependencies between India and Afghanistan, at a time when the Taliban require assistance, effectively does just that.
Trump's approval ratings suffer a blow
It wans't a happy week for US President Donald Trump.
First came news that his approval rating fell to 38%, the lowest since his return to power, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll. He started his second term in office in January with 47% of Americans approving of him. The lowest in his first term was 33%.
Ironically, the 9-point decline brings his approval ratings closer to the weakest ratings for his Democratic predecessor in the White House, Joe Biden—the guy he loves to bash and ridicule.
It seems tariffs have come to bite as economists believe Trump’s ratings have been pulled down by the high cost of living resulting from high levies on imports.
More bad news—the Republican-controlled US Congress voted to force the release of the Epstein files, something Trump vehemently opposed until recently. Just to be sure, that also contributed to Trump’s declining approval ratings. Just one in five voters approved of how he handled the matter.
Trump was a friend of the US financier and later convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein, for years. The President says they fell out and parted company in the early 2000s, before Epstein was first arrested.
The Epstein files surfaced again, this time at an event meant to spotlight Trump’s persuasive powers and bonhomie with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. During the Crown Prince’s visit to the White House, the US President had hoped that Salman would increase his promise of investing $600 billion to $1 trillion. He almost did. But what made news was Trump’s abrasive put-down of a reporter.
He called ABC reporter Mary Bruce a “terrible" person for her questions on Epstein, the Trump family’s business interests in Saudi Arabia, and the CIA pointing a finger at Crown Prince Salman for the 2018 death of Jamal Khashoggi.
Poor Trump! Hope someone thanks him for making America great again during the upcoming Thanksgiving week.
Elizabeth Roche is an associate professor at O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana.
Catch all the Business News, Market News, Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.
more
topics
Read Next Story

1 month ago
3






English (US) ·