ICT Sentences Former Minister Hasanul Haq Inu to 10 Years in Crimes Against Humanity Case
The International Crimes Tribunal-2 (ICT-2) on Tuesday sentenced former Information Minister and Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal (JASAD) President Hasanul Haq Inu to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment after finding him guilty on three charges of crimes against humanity committed during the July 2024 Mass Uprising in Kushtia.
The verdict was delivered by a three-member bench headed by Justice Nazrul Islam Chowdhury, with retired District and Sessions Judge Md. Manjurul Bachid and District and Sessions Judge Nur Mohammad Shahriar Kabir as the other members of the Tribunal.
Inu was the sole accused in the case. The prosecution had brought eight charges against him, alleging that he played a significant role in encouraging, facilitating and legitimising the violent suppression of anti-government protesters during the July uprising. After examining the evidence, the Tribunal convicted him on Charges 3, 6 and 7 while acquitting him of Charges 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8, holding that the prosecution had failed to establish his criminal responsibility in relation to those allegations.
For each of the three proven charges, the Tribunal imposed a sentence of 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment, resulting in a cumulative sentence of 30 years. However, the Tribunal directed that all sentences should run concurrently, meaning Inu will serve an effective sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment. The Tribunal also imposed fines of Tk 100,000 each under Charges 6 and 7.
The conviction under Charge 3 relates to the political persecution, torture and causing of injuries to victims, including prosecution witness Raisul Haque. Under Charge 6, the Tribunal found Inu guilty of conspiracy, incitement and complicity in crimes against humanity, while Charge 7 concerned his participation in a criminal conspiracy relating to the violence committed during the July uprising.
The Tribunal, however, acquitted Inu of five allegations after concluding that the prosecution had failed to prove them beyond the required legal standard. These included allegations that he publicly branded protesters as terrorists, participated in decisions to impose a nationwide curfew and “shoot-at-sight” orders, supported plans involving helicopter attacks against demonstrators, delivered further inflammatory public statements in support of the crackdown, and bore criminal responsibility for the killing of six protesters in Kushtia on 5 August 2024.
The judgment marks the sixth verdict delivered by the International Crimes Tribunals in cases arising from the July 2024 Mass Uprising and the third judgment rendered by ICT-2. Earlier judgments in five separate cases resulted in death sentences against 16 individuals, including former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and former Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal.
Inu was brought from the prison holding cell to the courtroom shortly before the hearing commenced at around 2:00 p.m. Witnesses present in court said he asked police officers not to hold his hands while escorting him into the dock. Dressed in a white panjabi and pyjama with brown shoes, he remained seated calmly with one leg crossed over the other as the Tribunal read out its judgment.
Following the verdict, Chief Prosecutor Mohammad Aminul Islam expressed dissatisfaction with the sentence and announced that the prosecution would appeal before the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court. He said the prosecution believed the punishment imposed did not adequately reflect the gravity of the offences and would seek a more severe sentence on appeal.
Under the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, Inu is also entitled to challenge the judgment before the Supreme Court within one month.
According to the prosecution, the investigation into Inu began on 25 March 2025 and concluded with the submission of an investigation report on 11 September 2025. Formal charges were filed on 25 September 2025, and following hearings, the Tribunal framed charges on 2 November 2025, formally commencing the trial. The prosecution began presenting its evidence on 1 December 2025.
The prosecution’s 39-page investigation report alleged that Inu had actively encouraged and facilitated the government’s violent response to the student-led uprising. Prosecutors argued that he repeatedly characterised protesters as terrorists, supported the use of lethal force, participated in political decisions concerning curfews and military deployment, instructed local law enforcement to suppress demonstrators, and sought to legitimise the crackdown through decisions taken by the ruling alliance. They further contended that, as a senior leader of the Awami League-led alliance, Inu bore criminal responsibility both for allegedly instigating former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and under the doctrine of superior command responsibility.
During the trial, prosecutors relied on an audio recording of a telephone conversation between Sheikh Hasina and Inu, which they argued demonstrated his support for suppressing the movement.
The defence, however, consistently denied all allegations, arguing that the prosecution had failed to establish any of the charges beyond reasonable doubt. Defence counsel maintained that the telephone conversation contained no instruction to shoot protesters, conduct bombings or commit acts of torture, and argued that no documentary or testimonial evidence had been produced to prove that Inu had ordered, encouraged or participated in crimes against humanity.
With both the prosecution and the defence expressing dissatisfaction with different aspects of the judgment, the case now appears set to proceed to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, where the Tribunal’s findings and sentence are likely to face further judicial scrutiny.