Name: Former Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina sentenced to death | Global News Podcast
Uploaded: 2025-11-18T16:50:06.000Z
Duration: 9 min 42 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

Welcome to the Global News Podcast on YouTube where we go behind the headlines to find out more about a story and why it matters.

Basic passive voice

In today's episode, we'll be looking at the news that the former prime minister of Bangladesh, Sheikha Sina, has been sentenced to death by a tribunal in Dhaka after she was found guilty of ordering security forces to kill protesters.

She's also been convicted of crimes against humanity.

Sheikh Hasina has been living in exile in India since she was ousted.

Our global affairs reporter and Barasan Etirajan has been following the story extensively.

And Barasan, take us back to the time of the protests.

A student leader was shot dead in the northern part of the country.

And it was broadcast live on many television channels.

And also people using their social media channels, live channels, because they were covering the protests.

So that was a spark for the protest to widen.

And also, Sheikha Zina was the powerful prime minister at that time.

Instead of reaching out to the students, what she was calling them as, you know, anti nationals, like making a reference to what happened during the country's independence struggle in 1971.

So that again, angered students, brought in more people to the streets.

And then it was getting bigger and bigger.

You see thousands of people coming onto the streets, waving the national flag, singing patriotic songs, holding big banners saying, no more to fascism.

And also using the small flags as headbands.

And they showed the defiance on the streets of Bangladesh.

And that again, the government was angered by these protests.

But what they did was they failed to see the growing anger within the country.

And gradually, people from other walks of life also joined, like civil society groups, political parties, and

also Islamists and students from madrasas.

So when more and more people coming in and the government was trying to clamp down on these protests and the violence escalated, students were killed, and

in some places, police officers were killed.

So the situation was going out of control when she deployed paramilitary forces and also finally the army.

By the time she tried to reach out to the students, it was too late because dozens of people had died by that time.

And it was one of those big generations, Generation Z or Generation Z protests, you know, before it was happening in other places where the students were leading, asking for a change in government.

They want democracy to be restored because they said they were tired of this repressive rule for 15 years.

And then they started storming many of the government buildings when there were more and more deaths were reported, it was all on social media.

It was one of those where people are capturing all these events on telephone, on their mobile phones and then putting it on social media live feed.

It was one of those social media led protests, you can say, and

that brought the people from all walks of life.

Before they stormed into her official resident, she fled the country.

She went to India and that was a massive uprising.

Quite unprecedented, extraordinary event for Bangladesh and now a death sentence.

She has been living in India since she fled the country.

So the trial which started in June, she's being tried in absentia, she is not personally present and she has defied the court orders to return to the country to face the charges.

And her argument has been this has been a kangaroo court.

It was a farce, it was a judicial farce and it was a preordained guilt verdict.

That was one of the reasons why she was refusing to come back.

The government did appoint a lawyer on her behalf, but

again there may be questions about how much say whether she had in appointing her own lawyer.

So there can be questions about the process followed about this tribunal.

This is not an international criminal court.

So how far the standards matching between the ICC as well as the Bangladeshi tribunal.

One thing as I pointed out earlier, there was a lot of evidence on videos and people taking photographs about this massive protest.

It became like a national event at that time when people from all walks of life, even children were coming out and taking part because of 15 years they had stifling of dissent.

Even the student protests were crushed earlier.

So that was the outburst that happened even though she was, was not there.

Obviously she can challenge it and also whether it meets the international standards.

But for many people who went through this, for the families and the victims, it is a cathartic moment that she was given a guilty verdict and then they want closure.

But again whether how far the verdict can satisfy for the people who lost their loved ones because they're not going to get them back.

And life changing injuries for many people.

And it wasn't that long ago that she was seen as something of an economic hero.

She was one of the longest serving prime ministers in the world and she was always seen as a model.

You can see her wearing colorful silk saris or Bangladeshi made sarees and coming on global stages with the leaders, all the US presidents and they will be always showcasing Bangladesh as a development model because of the economy.

I was based in Bangladesh for three years and I met her quite a few times at that time, interviews.

And she always would come across as someone very, you know, full of warmth and affection.

She will ask you, she will, first thing I know, any help you need, always come back and you should have food.

So she was a very, you know, when you talk to her she will come up as a very lovely person with a full of warmth and smile.

And she was seen as a democracy pro democracy icon in the 80s.

She was in the forefront against the military rule and she was fighting for restoring democracy in Bangladesh in the 80s and again in 2007.

Even though there was some attempts were made to retire her from politics.

One thing she's all, she's a very, you know, very strong woman, a fighter.

And don't forget it is a male dominated society, you know, in South Asia and a Muslim majority nation for women leaders it is very difficult.

They have to assert themselves even though they have other examples like Benazir Bhutto, Indira Gandhi.

But then what many people told me when I was in Bangladesh as well, like if she had conducted the elections free and fair, she could have won.

But the fact that after a while the sense of insecurity gets what happens if I lose power?

That is why at once opposition parties boycotted the election.

But no was expecting her to pass such a draconian laws like the Digital Security Act.

Thousands of opposition supporters were put in jail.

She was disregarding the opinion of the UN human rights office as well as the human rights groups and she got closer and closer with India.

So at one point probably she thought India would support her in international arena.

And I also spoke to US ambassadors in Dhaka or Indian officials.

They all thought probably India was in a way backing her up that would save her.

But at a point reached that made even lot of Bangladeshis to turn against India, There was a lot of anti India feeling within Bangladesh.

These two countries share very close ties.

But in the end, you know, when you go on the top, when you are sitting at the top of the pyramid, you are cut off from the rest of the society.

You don't understand what the people are thinking on the ground, on the streets and you get surrounded by people who tell you what you want to hear rather than what you should hear and probably that was one of the reasons why, you know, she a pro democracy icon who later turned into a sort of autocrat.

Briefly, is there any chance India will send her back to Bangladesh?