Sentencing Under the International Crimes Tribunals in Bangladesh: A Critical Analysis

Abstract

The international community, in the aftermath of the Second World War, has been united in its resolve to not treat extraordinary crimes, such as genocide and crimes against humanity, with impunity. Yet, there has been a deliberate gap in international jurisprudence regarding the determination and distribution of punishment for such crimes. In the absence of guidance from the international community, the recently formed International Crimes Tribunals in Bangladesh (ICT-BD I & II) have established the death penalty for perpetrators of genocide and crimes against humanity. After a forty-year delay, these trials have been instituted to redress the atrocities committed by local collaborators in 1971, during the hostile separation of East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, and West Pakistan. In analysing the penal framework of the tribunals, this paper answers two important questions; firstly, whether capital punishment is consistent with the values and principles of international criminal law; secondly, whether the tribunals’ practice of awarding the death penalty can actually foster justice and reconciliation in a nation distraught by political turmoil and polarized public opinion. Applying a retributivist critique, this paper finds that even if Bangladesh’s sentencing practices may not contravene international law and norms, a more enlightened model of justice is required to enable national reconciliation.