Why in news?

Former Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina is facing multiple criminal cases in Bangladesh, leading to the possibility that her extradition may be sought by the Bangladeshi government.

In an interview with Reuters on August 15, Bangladesh’s de facto foreign minister Touhid Hossain indicated that if the country's home and law ministries decide, they may require Hasina to return. He acknowledged that this could diplomatically embarrass India but expressed confidence that India would handle the situation appropriately.

What’s in today’s article?

• Extradition treaty between India and Bangladesh
• Hasina’s possible extradition by Bangladesh
• India’s dilemma w.r.t Hasina

Extradition treaty between India and Bangladesh

• Treaty signed in 2013
  • India and Bangladesh signed an extradition treaty in 2013, amended in 2016 to streamline the process of exchanging fugitives.
  • The treaty was established due to concerns over Indian insurgents, particularly from the North East, hiding in Bangladesh, and Bangladeshi militants.
    • Many Bangladeshi militants such as those from Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB), sought refuge in Indian states like West Bengal and Assam.
  • The treaty enabled India to successfully extradite Anup Chetia, a top leader of the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA), from Bangladesh in 2015.
  • Since then, another fugitive has been extradited to India, and India has also handed over a few Bangladeshi fugitives to its neighbor under the treaty.
• Key provisions of the treaty
  • The extradition treaty between India and Bangladesh mandates that both countries extradite individuals who:
    • have been charged with, found guilty of, or
    • are wanted for committing an extraditable offence by a court in the requesting country.
  • An extraditable offence, as defined by the treaty, is one that carries a minimum punishment of one year imprisonment, including financial crimes.
  • For an offence to be considered extraditable, the principle of dual criminality must apply, meaning the offence must be punishable in both countries.
  • The treaty also allows for extradition in cases involving attempts to commit, aiding, abetting, inciting, or participating as an accomplice in an extraditable offence.
• Exceptions to these rules
  • The extradition treaty between India and Bangladesh allows for refusal of extradition if the offence is of a political nature.
  • However, this exemption is limited by a detailed list of offences that cannot be classified as political.
  • These include serious crimes such as murder, manslaughter, assault, causing explosions, possession of explosives or weapons with intent to endanger life, use of firearms to resist arrest, property damage with intent to endanger life, kidnapping, hostage-taking, incitement to murder, and any terrorism-related offences.

India’s dilemma w.r.t Hasina

• Can Hasina be extradited by Bangladesh?
  • Hasina, a political player, is facing multiple serious charges that complicate her potential claim for political asylum in India.
  • The charges include:
    • Accused of murdering a grocery store owner who was killed in police firing.
    • Accused of enforced disappearance related to the kidnapping of a lawyer in 2015.
    • Charged with murder, torture, and genocide in a separate case.
  • The situation is complicated by a 2016 treaty amendment, which removed the need for evidence of the alleged crime in extradition cases.
  • Now, only an arrest warrant from a competent court in the requesting country is required for extradition.
• Given a request, will India have to send Hasina back?
  • India can refuse Hasina's extradition.
  • Article 8 lists out multiple grounds for refusal including cases in which:
    • an accusation has not been made in good faith in the interests of justice or
    • in case of military offences which are not an offence under the general criminal law.
  • India has the option of refusing Hasina’s extradition on the ground that the accusations made against her are not “in good faith in the interests of justice”.
    • Article 7, which allows refusal if the person can be tried in the Requested State, is not applicable in Hasina's case.
  • But this has the potential to adversely impact New Delhi’s relations with Dhaka’s new ruling dispensation.
• What should India do?
  • India faces a diplomatic dilemma with the case of Sheikh Hasina, balancing its long-standing relationship with her against its strategic interests in maintaining good relations with Bangladesh.
  • A former RAW officer suggested that India's critical interests are not served by extraditing Hasina, arguing that legalities are secondary to political and strategic considerations.
  • He emphasized that Bangladesh's deep-rooted political and military connections with India will persist, regardless of the current interim government’s stance.
  • Security sources and a former diplomat also indicated that national interests typically outweigh legal formalities in such cases.
    • Beyond diplomacy, having a treaty means its legal provisions have to be satisfied.
    • There are multiple examples of relations between two countries being healthy despite pending extradition requests.
  • The diplomat noted that the situation is still unfolding, as the case is in its early stages and the extradition process will evolve over time.