On December 1, 2025, a court in Dhaka, Bangladesh, handed down a verdict that has sent shockwaves through both Bangladeshi and British political circles. Former Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was sentenced in absentia to five years in prison for corruption linked to the illegal allocation of government land. Alongside her, her niece—British Labour Party lawmaker Tulip Siddiq—received a two-year sentence, also in absentia, for her role in influencing the allocation of a land plot to her own family members.
The case, which has been described by critics as politically charged and deeply flawed, centers on a government land project intended for a new township to alleviate Dhaka’s chronic housing and population pressures. According to Reuters, prosecutors argued that Hasina, Siddiq, and Siddiq’s mother, Sheikh Rehana, abused their authority to unlawfully secure a 13,610-square-foot plot in the capital through political collusion and influence during Hasina’s tenure as prime minister.
Judge Rabiul Alam of Dhaka’s Special Judge’s Court declared that Hasina had misused her power as the country’s leader, while Siddiq was found guilty of corruptly influencing her aunt to help her mother and two siblings obtain the land. Rehana, considered the prime participant in the scheme, was sentenced to seven years in prison. All three were fined approximately $813 each, with the court warning that failure to pay would result in an additional six months’ imprisonment. The allotted plot was also ordered to be canceled. Fourteen other individuals implicated in the case received five-year sentences.
The prosecution had sought life sentences for the principal defendants. Khan Mohammed Mainul Hasan, the corruption watchdog’s prosecutor, told The Associated Press, “We expected life sentences, (but) that did not happen. We will consult with the commission for our next course of action.”
Tulip Siddiq, who represents London’s Hampstead and Highgate in the UK Parliament, has consistently denied all allegations, describing herself as “collateral damage” in what she sees as a political vendetta against her family. In a statement following the verdict, Siddiq called the entire process “flawed and farcical.” She added, “The outcome of this kangaroo court is as predictable as it is unjustified. I hope this so-called ‘verdict’ will be treated with the contempt it deserves.” Siddiq further emphasized her commitment to her British constituents, saying, “My focus has always been my constituents in Hampstead and Highgate, and I refuse to be distracted by the dirty politics of Bangladesh.”
This is not the first time Siddiq’s familial ties have caused political ripples. In January 2025, she resigned as the UK government’s economic secretary to the Treasury, citing mounting pressure over her relationship with Hasina. At the time, Siddiq stated she had been cleared of wrongdoing but was stepping down because the situation had become “a distraction from the work of the government.”
Despite the Bangladesh court’s assertion that Siddiq was tried as a Bangladeshi citizen—citing her passport, national identity card, and tax number—Siddiq herself has disputed this, insisting she is solely a British citizen. The UK does not have an extradition treaty with Bangladesh, making the likelihood of Siddiq serving time in Bangladesh extremely slim.
The response from Siddiq’s Labour Party in the UK has been unequivocal. A spokesperson criticized the legal proceedings, stating, “Anyone facing any charge should always be afforded the right to make legal representations when allegations are made against them. Given that has not happened in this case, we cannot recognize this judgment.” The party further noted that Siddiq had not been informed of the details of the charges against her, a breach of basic legal standards.
These concerns have been echoed by a group of prominent British lawyers and former cabinet ministers, including Cherie Blair, Sir Robert Buckland, and Dominic Grieve. In an open letter, they raised “profound concerns” over the fairness of Siddiq’s trial, labeling the proceedings “artificial and a contrived and unfair way of pursuing a prosecution.” The letter stated Siddiq “did not have a proper opportunity of defending herself” and that she was “being tried in her absence without justification.” The lawyers called on Bangladeshi authorities to allow Siddiq’s legal team a fair chance to respond to the allegations.
The political backdrop in Bangladesh is equally fraught. Hasina, who was ousted from power in 2024 after a mass uprising ended her 15-year rule, fled to India in August of that year. She has since been tried in absentia for multiple charges. In November 2025, she was sentenced to death for crimes against humanity related to a crackdown on demonstrators during the protests that toppled her government. Last week, she received a combined 21-year prison sentence in separate corruption cases involving the same township project. Hasina’s son and daughter were each sentenced to five years in jail. Rehana and Siddiq’s two siblings are also abroad, facing their own charges related to the unrest.
All of the recent trials—including Monday’s—were conducted without the defendants present and without defense lawyers appointed. Hasina’s Awami League party, now banned, has condemned the verdicts as “entirely predictable,” accusing the Anti-Corruption Commission of being led by “desperate, unelected men” under the interim government of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus. Hasina herself, in a statement via the party, said, “No country is free from corruption. But corruption needs to be investigated in a way that is not itself corrupt. The ACC has failed that test today. It is controlled by an unelected government run by the Awami League’s political opponents. It has exclusively targeted members of the Awami League, or those seen to be sympathetic to our party, and done nothing to prosecute or even investigate the cronyism that has escalated in Bangladesh since Dr. Mohammad Yunus and his so-called interim government took power.”
For its part, the interim government has maintained that its anti-corruption drive is impartial and necessary to restore public trust. Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel laureate at its helm, has scheduled the next parliamentary elections for February 2026, promising a return to democratic governance. Yet with high-profile verdicts like these, the political climate remains tense, and questions about the fairness and motivations of Bangladesh’s judiciary linger—especially as international scrutiny grows.
As the dust settles on these controversial convictions, the future of Bangladesh’s political landscape hangs in the balance, with the world watching closely to see whether the upcoming elections will bring resolution or further discord.
