By David Bergman
Dhaka, Mar 14 (bdnews24.com)—An expert panel of international lawyers, including a former war crimes prosecutor, has submitted a legal opinion to the government setting out reasons why Bangladesh's legislation for planned war crimes trials is not compatible with international standards.
The lawyers recommend a further 17 changes to the recently amended International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973, arguing that it contains "significant omissions" regarding protection of rights of those on trial and "out of date" definitions of war crimes.
The legal opinion, written by the War Crimes Committee of the International Bar Association (IBA), was formally submitted at the end of February to the Bangladesh government by the UK's All-Party Parliamentary Human Rights Group who had requested the legal advice.
The UK parliamentary group told bdnews24.com that the Bangladesh High Commission in London had confirmed 12 days ago that it had sent the legal advice to the "relevant government authorities" in Bangladesh.
A spokesperson from the group said, "We are now waiting for a more substantive reply from the relevant government authorities."
Law minister Shafique Ahmed who is out of the country could not be reached for comment, but state minister Kamrul Islam told bdnews24.com on Sunday he had not yet seen the legal opinion.
"I have not officially received a copy of the document. When the law minister returns and we receive a copy, we will review it."
Trial of 1971 war crimes was among the top election pledges of Sheikh Hasina's Awami League government. The government, since coming to power in January last year, has taken a number of steps to put Bangladeshis in the dock who face charges of genocide, rape, arson, looting and abetting the Pakistani occupation forces during the 1971 liberation war.
Among these steps was the amendment of the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973. Law minister Shafique Ahmed tabled the bill for its amendment in parliament last July 8, following a process of consultation with the Law Commission. The parliamentary standing committee on law was given one night to scrutinise the bill, before its passage the following day.
AREAS OF CONCERN
The IBA's War Crimes Committee comprises a 20-member expert advisory board, including Justice Richard Goldstone who was a former chief prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Court.
They recommend 17 changes to the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973, amended by the government last year, though they do acknowledge that the legislation "provides a system that is broadly compatible with current international standards".
The IBA's "area of greatest concern" in the amended Act involves the rights of individuals on trial where there are "some significant omission of the accepted international standards", according to the legal opinion submitted to the government.
The Act should not allow tribunals to continue in absence of any of its members, the lawyers argue. The accused must also have the right to challenge the constitution of the tribunal as well as the appointment of its members if "possible prejudice" arises during the trial, say the international lawyers.
The provisions concerning the process of investigation, in particular the rules relating to self-incrimination, are "complicated", "confusing" and "should be removed as unnecessary", the legal opinion says.
The lawyers advise that sections of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court dealing with rights of suspects during investigations should be included in the Act. They also propose that Article 14 of the International Covenant on Political Rights which sets out "fundamental principles which protect the rights of individuals before a court of law", should be incorporated.
The legal note raises concerns about definitions of two offences in the Act. It states that the definition of "crimes against humanity" used in the Act "misses an important element of the more modern definition" which says the crimes must be "widespread or systematic" and the accused person must have had "knowledge" of the crimes.
It also says that the offence of "crime against peace" should be deleted as it contains "outdated statutory language which remains undefined in most recent statutes in international criminal law".
http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?id=155832&cid=2
Bangladesh is celebrating a democratic dictatorship. Sufferers were 1 newspaper, 2 TV channels, Facebook, Youtube for different period of times. The 3rd largest party which is the largest Islamist party of Bangladesh is virtually banned and 18 of its top leadership is in jail
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment