Hasina's Passport Bid Puts Dhaka And Delhi On A Collision Course

Hasina has told Reuters that she intends to return to Bangladesh and surrender before a court. Her aides said Monday that they would announce a date after completing the necessary formalities.

Her possible return would be politically explosive. The Awami League, which dominated Bangladesh's political landscape for much of the past two decades, is now banned, while many senior party figures remain imprisoned or in exile.

Prime Minister Tarique Rahman's government, which took office after the February 2026 election, has maintained that Hasina should return through the existing extradition mechanism rather than as an ordinary traveler.

Foreign Affairs State Minister Humaiun Kobir rejected the passport initiative on Monday, calling it“ridiculous.”

“She is not coming to visit her maternal grandparents. She is a terrorist. She must come through the prisoner extradition treaty,” Kobir told reporters at the Foreign Ministry.

His remarks reflected the government's position that Hasina's criminal conviction and fugitive status should determine how she returns, rather than her ability to obtain a passport.

Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed took a more procedural approach, saying the government was examining the laws governing passports, citizenship and national identity documents before deciding how to respond.

“Everything, including the Passport Act, Citizenship Act and NID laws, is being scrutinized,” he told reporters at the Secretariat.

Salahuddin said the foreign and law ministries were reviewing the application and the relevant legal provisions. He confirmed that Bangladesh had already submitted a formal request to India for Hasina's extradition.

The central legal question is whether a criminal conviction automatically disqualifies a Bangladeshi citizen from obtaining a passport. Under the Bangladesh Passport Order of 1973, the answer is not straightforward.

Article 6 allows authorities to refuse a passport to someone convicted within the preceding five years of an offense involving moral turpitude and sentenced to at least two years in prison. It also permits refusal where an applicant is evading criminal proceedings or is subject to a court order restricting departure.

The law gives the government further grounds to refuse documents on national security and public interest grounds. Some provisions are discretionary, while others require refusal when specified conditions are met.

Hasina's death sentence presents an unusual legal question because the conviction provision specifically refers to imprisonment of at least two years. Whether a death sentence satisfies that provision, or whether other grounds independently justify refusal, would require legal determination.

Crucially, the law does not impose a blanket prohibition on every convicted citizen applying for a passport. Nor does conviction itself automatically terminate Bangladeshi citizenship.

A 2023 Bangladesh High Court judgment also established that passport authorities cannot arbitrarily withhold travel documents merely because criminal cases are pending. Restrictions on movement must have a lawful basis. Hasina's circumstances differ substantially, however, because she has already been convicted and is living outside the country.

The extradition treaty adds another complication. Bangladesh and India signed their extradition agreement in January 2013, and it entered into force that October. The agreement, subsequently amended, provides a framework for transferring individuals accused or convicted of serious offenses between the neighboring countries.

Under Article 2, an offense generally qualifies for extradition if the underlying conduct is punishable by at least one year's imprisonment under both countries' laws.