International Crimes Tribunal (Bangladesh)

The International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) is a special court in Bangladesh that tries people accused of the most serious crimes known to world law: genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Although it has "international" in its name, it is a domestic (national) court of Bangladesh, with Bangladeshi judges, working under a Bangladeshi law. The word "international" refers to the type of crimes it tries, not to the court itself.

It was first set up to try crimes committed during Bangladesh's 1971 Liberation War, and since 2024 it has also been trying crimes linked to the 2024 uprising.

Why does it exist?

In 1971, during Bangladesh's war of independence from Pakistan, there were mass killings, rapes and other atrocities against civilians. A new country needed a way to punish those responsible, so that victims got justice and such crimes were not forgotten. Ordinary criminal courts deal with single crimes like murder or theft. They are not designed for huge, planned attacks on whole populations.

A special tribunal with a special law was meant to fill that gap. Think of it like a special fast-track court created only for one very serious category of cases.

Where did it come from?

The story has three phases:

• 1973, the law: Bangladesh's Parliament passed the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 on 20 July 1973. Just before that, the Constitution was amended (Article 47(3)) to protect this law from being struck down by courts. The plan was to try 195 Pakistani army officers held as prisoners of war. But under the Tripartite Agreement of April 1974 between India, Bangladesh and Pakistan, signed in New Delhi, these 195 prisoners were sent back to Pakistan without trial. The law stayed on the books but was not used for decades.
• 2009 to 2015, the war crimes trials: In 2009, the law was amended, and on 25 March 2010 the government set up the first tribunal (ICT-1). A second tribunal (ICT-2) was added in March 2012. These tribunals tried mostly Bangladeshi leaders accused of helping the Pakistani army in 1971. From 2015, only ICT-1 kept functioning.
• 2024 onwards, the uprising cases: After the government fell in August 2024, the interim government reconstituted the tribunal on 14 October 2024 and used it to try those accused of the violent crackdown on protesters. ICT-2 was revived in 2025.

How does a case work?

The process moves step by step:

1. An investigation agency attached to the tribunal collects evidence and witness statements.
2. A prosecution team files formal charges before the tribunal.
3. A bench of three judges (a chairman and two members) hears the case. The tribunal can hold the trial in absentia, which means the accused can be tried even if they are absent or have run away.
4. The tribunal gives its verdict and sentence. Punishments can go up to the death penalty.
5. An appeal can be filed before the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh, the country's highest court.

The key facts UPSC can ask about

• Crimes covered: crimes against humanity, crimes against peace, genocide, war crimes and other crimes under international law.
• 2009 amendment: allowed individuals and "groups of individuals" (not only members of armed forces) to be tried.
• 2013 amendment: passed after a 2013 verdict gave a life sentence to a war crimes accused (Abdul Quader Mollah). Huge street protests followed, known as the Shahbag movement, demanding a death sentence. Parliament then amended the Act to allow the government to appeal against a verdict, and to allow organisations to be tried. On appeal, the Supreme Court raised Mollah's sentence to death in September 2013. He was executed in December 2013.
• First verdict: January 2013, a death sentence in absentia against Abul Kalam Azad for 1971 crimes.
• November 2024 amendment: the interim government changed the Act to bring some provisions closer to the Rome Statute (the treaty behind the International Criminal Court).
• May 2025 amendment: an ordinance empowered the tribunal to suspend or ban a political party or its linked bodies, cancel its registration or seize its property, if found involved in such crimes. Soon after, the government banned the activities of Sheikh Hasina's party (the Awami League) under the Anti-Terrorism Act, until the tribunal's trials are complete.
• Verdict against Sheikh Hasina: On 17 November 2025, the tribunal sentenced her to death in absentia for crimes against humanity over the 2024 crackdown. The former Home Minister was also sentenced to death in absentia. The former police chief, who became a state witness (approver), received five years in prison.

The background: the 2024 uprising

In July 2024, students protested against a quota system in government jobs. The protests grew into a mass movement, and the security forces cracked down hard. A UN human rights fact-finding report released in February 2025 estimated that around 1,400 people may have been killed between 1 July and 15 August 2024. It found reasonable grounds to believe that crimes against humanity may have been committed.

On 5 August 2024, Sheikh Hasina resigned and left for India. An interim government took charge, and Bangladesh held its next general election on 12 February 2026.

India's position and Indian examples

India has no direct role in the tribunal, but the tribunal's verdict sits at the centre of Bangladesh's request to extradite Sheikh Hasina from India. India has generally described the matter as one to be handled through legal processes. Under India's own law, extradition requests are handled under the Extradition Act, 1962 and the India-Bangladesh Extradition Treaty (2013, amended 2016), which allows refusal in some cases, for example if the offence is of a political nature.

Commonly confused concepts

• ICT (Bangladesh) vs International Criminal Court (ICC): The ICT is a national court of Bangladesh. The ICC is a permanent world court in The Hague, set up under the Rome Statute (1998), which came into force in 2002. Bangladesh is a member of the ICC. India is not.
• ICT vs International Court of Justice (ICJ): The ICJ, also in The Hague, is the main court of the UN. It settles disputes between countries, not cases against individuals.
• ICT vs special UN-backed courts: Courts like the one for Cambodia's Khmer Rouge crimes were "hybrid" courts with both national and international judges. Bangladesh's ICT has only Bangladeshi judges.
• Crimes against humanity vs genocide: Crimes against humanity are widespread or systematic attacks on civilians (murder, torture, enforced disappearance). Genocide needs a special intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, in whole or in part.

Issues, criticism and the way forward

• Fair trial concerns: International human rights groups and UN experts have, over the years, questioned whether trials met international standards. Concerns include trials in absentia, limited time for defence and the use of the death penalty.
• Retrospective changes: The 2013 amendment, which allowed the government to appeal after a verdict had already been given, was criticised as unfair to the accused. Supporters argued it changed only procedure, not the crime.
• Constitutional shield: Articles 47(3) and 47A of Bangladesh's Constitution limit some fundamental rights of people accused under this law. Critics see this as weakening safeguards.
• The other view: Supporters say the tribunal finally gave justice to victims of 1971 after decades, and that the 2024 cases respond to serious, documented killings of protesters. They point out that the UN fact-finding report itself called for accountability.
• Way forward suggested by rights bodies: a moratorium on the death penalty, strong defence rights, protection for witnesses, and trials that meet international fair trial standards, so that verdicts are widely accepted both at home and abroad.

Concepts to Know

• In absentia: A Latin phrase meaning "in absence". A trial in absentia is held without the accused person being present in court.
• Crimes against humanity: Serious crimes like murder, torture or enforced disappearance, committed as part of a widespread or planned attack on ordinary people.
• Extradition: The legal process by which one country hands over a person to another country to face trial or serve a sentence.
• Interim government: A temporary government that runs a country for a short time, usually until fresh elections are held.
• Approver (state witness): An accused person who agrees to give evidence against the other accused, usually in return for a lighter punishment.
• Ordinance: A temporary law made by the executive (through the head of state) when Parliament is not in session or not functioning.