In a detailed legal submission, UK-based international human rights lawyer Barrister M.R. Khan argues that charges of crimes against humanity against former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her administration over the July-August 2024 riots cannot be sustained under international or domestic law.
Khan’s report, dated December 10, 2025, labels the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT-BD) verdict issued on November 17, 2025, as a “classic example of miscarriage of justice.” The submission, which draws on the Rome Statute and precedents from international tribunals, contends that the events were reactive riot control measures rather than a systematic attack on civilians.
Khan’s analysis comes amid ongoing controversy surrounding the Jamaat-controlled interim government’s actions following the July conspiracy, which led to Sheikh Hasina’s ouster. The report emphasises that Bangladesh, as a signatory to the Rome Statute since 2010, must align its domestic International Crimes Tribunal Act (ICTA) 1973 with international standards under Article 7.
Core Elements of Crimes Against Humanity Not Met
The submission outlines the four cumulative elements required for crimes against humanity under Article 7 of the Rome Statute: an “attack,” which must be widespread or systematic, directed against a civilian population, and pursuant to a state or organisational policy.
PBI files final report in false July case, seeks discharge of Sheikh Hasina, others
Under Yunus, law and order in Bangladesh at its worst in history
Liberation War Legacy Under Scrutiny: Yunusโ revisions spark controversy
Khan argues that the government’s response was not an “attack” but a “reactive response” to violent riots. He cites admissions from protest coordinators and allies, including BNP leaders, who reportedly confessed to killing police officers and destroying infrastructure like metro rails and the BTV Bhaban. “Such actions clearly prove the so-called ‘protests’ were in fact a violent riot, not a peaceful movement,” the report states, referencing annexed photos of atrocities allegedly committed by rioters.
Furthermore, Khan asserts that the victimsโdescribed as rioters engaged in hostilitiesโdo not qualify as “civilians” under international law, citing Article 51(3) of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions: “Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Protocol, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.”
The report also dismisses the “widespread or systematic” nature, calling the clashes “spontaneous and chaotic,” and rejects any evidence of a state policy, noting that security forces acted under domestic laws like the Criminal Procedure Code and Police Regulations of Bengal to restore order.
Drawing on International Precedents and Jurisprudence
Khan supports his arguments with case law from the International Criminal Court (ICC), the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). For instance, he references the ICC’s Kenya Authorisation Decision (2010), which requires actions to be organised and not spontaneous for crimes against humanity. Similarly, the ICTY’s Prosecutor v. Tadiฤ (1999) and Prosecutor v. Blaลกkiฤ (2000) are cited to clarify that individuals in violent acts lose civilian status.
Rule Without Mandate: 85 extrajudicial killings under Yunus regime
Political prisoners, including 120+ MPs and ministers, languishing in jail
GCDG report recalls police killings, release of militants in July-August 2024
The submission includes a side-by-side comparison table evaluating the July-August events against the Rome Statute elements, concluding that none are met. Khan also points to global examples like the Hong Kong protests (2019-2020) and the US George Floyd protests (2020), where, despite casualties and excessive force allegations, no international body classified them as crimes against humanity.
“Even large numbers of deaths, without evidence of intent or policy, do not meet the threshold,” Khan writes, emphasising that riot control, even if lethal, falls under domestic human rights law rather than international criminal law.
Verdict Labelled Invalid and Fabricated
In his conclusion, Khan declares the ICT-BD verdict against Hasina and her administration “invalid, fabricated, and unfounded” with “malicious intention.” He argues that the proceedings would face “immediate quashment” if brought before the ICC, based on established precedents.
While acknowledging potential human rights concerns warranting domestic review, Khan insists the events represent “internal violent unrest” and “mob violence,” not an orchestrated campaign. “Criminal accountability, if any, lies within domestic or human rights law, not international criminal law,” the report states.
Khan, an international human rights lawyer based in the UK, prepared the submission independently, enclosing annexes with evidence of rioters’ violence. The document has circulated among legal circles and Hasina supporters, potentially fueling calls for international scrutiny of Bangladesh’s judicial processes under the interim government. As of now, the ICT-BD and interim authorities have not responded to the submission.
English 
Bengali