Sheikh Hasina — long the central figure in Bangladesh’s political landscape — is currently staying in Delhi following a violent summer of unrest that overturned her government. Once a leader praised for extended economic progress, Hasina now confronts sweeping allegations of authoritarianism, mass protests, and legal challenges that have dramatically altered her political standing.
The crisis escalated in August 2024, when widespread student protests over recruitment quotas swept through the country and escalated into intense street clashes. At the height of the unrest, Hasina left Dhaka by helicopter and relocated to India. An interim administration led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus has taken charge in Dhaka and pledged elections next year. Meanwhile, Hasina has begun appearing in public again — walking in Delhi parks and speaking to media — portraying herself as both free and cautious.
Hasina frames her current position through the prism of personal history. She recalls the 1975 military coup that left much of her family dead — including her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman — and says that memory shapes her caution today. In interviews, she stresses that her return to Bangladesh would only be possible under a lawful government and respect for the rule of law, arguing that personal safety and institutional guarantees are non-negotiable.
The interim government has taken sharp action against the Awami League. Authorities have suspended the party’s formal activities, citing national security concerns and alleged crimes against humanity. The Election Commission reportedly suspended the party’s registration in May, an extraordinary step that Hasina calls an attempt to silence millions of supporters. She warns that barring the Awami League from elections would call the polls’ legitimacy into question and could provoke calls for voter boycotts by large segments of the electorate.
Political dynamics in Bangladesh are complex. With an electorate numbering in the hundreds of millions, some analysts suggest the rival BNP could gain advantage if the Awami League remains sidelined — but Hasina and her allies insist the party is not a private fiefdom and that its exclusion would undermine democratic choice. Her son and adviser has previously signalled that the family could resume leadership roles if circumstances require, though Hasina emphasizes the party belongs to the nation, not an individual household.
A separate legal shadow also looms. International investigators and rights bodies have cited violent crackdowns on protesters, with reports alleging hundreds killed and many more wounded during the unrest. Hasina dismisses those proceedings as politically motivated, calling the process a “kangaroo court” that pre-empted fair trial rights. She insists she has not had a proper opportunity to defend herself and maintains that the charges are part of a political campaign to block her comeback.
A key legal decision is expected on November 13, a date that could determine whether she faces formal disqualification from political life. If the outcome is adverse, it may effectively bar her from returning to frontline politics. If the decision favours her, the political contest ahead could take on a different character — but uncertainty will persist either way.
As Bangladesh heads toward promised elections, the contest will be shaped by questions of legitimacy, legal process and mass sentiment. Hasina’s presence in Delhi — publicly open yet guarded — crystallises the wider dilemma: can Bangladesh hold elections that both rival parties and international observers regard as free and fair while addressing the deep political rifts exposed by months of turmoil? The coming weeks will be crucial in answering that question.