Ousted Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has sought a new passport and national identity card through lawyers in London, setting up a legal and diplomatic confrontation between Dhaka and New Delhi over whether a convicted fugitive can obtain travel documents while facing extradition.
The request, submitted to the Bangladesh High Commission in New Delhi by Matrix Chambers, comes as Hasina prepares for a possible return in December, more than two years after fleeing to India following a student-led uprising that ended her 15-year uninterrupted rule.
But Bangladeshi officials have questioned whether the lawyers were authorized to represent her, while the government is examining the legal grounds for issuing documents to a former leader sentenced to death for crimes against humanity.
In a letter addressed to Acting High Commissioner Preeti Rahman, British barrister Steven Powles KC sought a replacement passport and National Identity Card, or NID, arguing that Hasina remains a Bangladeshi citizen despite the reported cancellation of her existing documents.
The correspondence, first reported by Reuters on Monday, asked the mission to process the request promptly, citing Bangladesh’s domestic laws and international human rights obligations.
A senior official at the Bangladesh High Commission told this correspondent that the mission had received the correspondence but had not established whether Hasina had personally authorized the lawyers to act on her behalf.
“We are not sure whether Sheikh Hasina officially appointed this law firm,” the official said. “Before treating the request as official, we need confirmation that she authorized the firm to act on her behalf.”
The official also questioned why Hasina, who lives in New Delhi, had chosen to communicate through British lawyers rather than approach the mission directly.
The letter has been forwarded to the relevant authorities in Dhaka, but the mission has not formally accepted it as an authenticated application.
The dispute comes against a complicated legal backdrop. Hasina was sentenced to death in absentia in November 2025 by Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal for crimes against humanity committed during the violent suppression of the 2024 uprising. She denies the charges.
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.
Article 6 allows refusal for political offenses but explicitly excludes murder, culpable homicide and several other violent crimes from that protection.
The treaty also contains safeguards against extradition sought for politically motivated persecution. India must therefore assess Bangladesh’s request under the treaty and its own legal procedures.
Nothing in the treaty itself expressly prevents a person facing extradition from requesting a passport from their country of citizenship. Passport issuance and extradition are separate legal processes.
A new passport would not invalidate Bangladesh’s extradition request, erase Hasina’s conviction or oblige India to permit her departure. Equally, the existence of an extradition treaty does not automatically bar voluntary return.
For New Delhi, the issue extends beyond travel documents. India’s decision to shelter Hasina after her August 2024 removal strained relations with Bangladesh. Her continued presence has remained a diplomatic irritant as Dhaka presses for her return.
Issuing a passport could facilitate voluntary travel, but it would not resolve the question of how she would be received by Bangladeshi authorities or what legal proceedings would follow her arrival.
International Crimes Tribunal Chief Prosecutor Md Aminul Islam dismissed the initiative on Monday as a “political stunt,” arguing that Hasina had taken no formal steps to surrender before the court.
He said the prosecution would continue pursuing the tribunal’s judgment, which also ordered the confiscation of assets belonging to Hasina and former Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal.
Faisal Mahmud is the managing editor of Daily Waadaa