Proceedings of Tribunal on the First Day of Deposition (Examination in Chief of Prosecution Witness No.1)

ICT-BD Case No 01 of 2011

Chief Prosecutor

Versus

Allama Delwar Hossain Sayedee

Date: 07^th December, 2011. Wednedsday.10:30 am

(The conversations are not accurate and cannot be quoted. These are brief summary of the conversations)

The Accused was produced before the Tribunal at 10.35 am. The Tribunal took their seat at 10.38 am.

10.38 am

The Tribunal member took their sits.

Prosecutor Haider Ali (HA) – My lord the prosecution is filing Hazira (appearance) of six prosecution witnesses.

Chairman (Ch) – Ok. Call up the list.

Bench Officer – called the case for recording of witnesses.

Defence Lawyer Tajul Islam (TI) – My lords we have three applications.

Ch – OK your application – Place your first application regarding Exculpatory Materials. But you cannot read out the application – place your oral submissions.

TI – I need to place all my submissions in the application and as such I will need to go through the application.

Ch – no you will have to contain oral argument.

10.41 am – Application for Exculpatory Materials.

TI made oral submission and went through some part of the Application.

10.58 am

Ch – your next application.

Application for disclosure of Seizure list documents and Investigation report

TI made oral submission and went through some part of the Application. When TI wanted to go though the list of 41 seizure list documents but Ch objected.

Ch – you do not need to go through the list – we got your list.

TI – I have to substantiate my application and need to show which of the documents are not submitted by the Prosecution.

Ch – If the prosecution did not give those documents then they cannot rely on them. If these are given during the trial then you will be given a copy at that time.

TI – the Accused is entitled to get those documents before the trial. Why can’t we get these documents at this stage? How can we prepare our defence without these documents?

TI went through the list of documents.

Member Justice Jahir Ahmed (JA) – prosecution you should take note of the list of the documents as stated by TI.

TI – We must get these documents before trial. We cannot prepare the defence without these documents. The trial cannot start before that.

One of the prosecutor Jiad Al Malum shouted from the prosecution side and said that the defence should behave themselves.

Ch became very angry to TI – you cannot say that ‘the trial cannot start without your getting documents’. You can at best say that the defence will be prejudiced. You cannot say that the Trial cannot start.

The prosecution bench was shouting to support Ch.

TI – towards the prosecution (very loudly) you should not interfere at the time of my submission.

JA got also angry to TI – why you shouted in this tribunal. Do you know that in Milesovic Trial he only said two words without permission and he was ousted from the Court room.

TI – I had to shout to stop the prosecution since you did not give me protection from what Prosecution’s aggressive behaviour towards me.

JA towards Prosecution – we warned you repeatedly to stop side talk, but you do not listen to us.

HA – my lord we apologize for that.

TI – my lord I also apologize for shouting.

11.16 am

Application for adjournment –

TI made oral submission and went through some part of the Application.

JA – the list of sizure list documents in your earlier application does not involve Sayedee. Why you need them?

TI – we do not know the contents of those documents – how we can be sure that they cannot be used against me. Moreover these documents may include exculpatory materials. According to rule 18 we are entitled to get these documents before commencement of trial and for preparation of defence.

TI continued the adjournment application and informed the Tribunal that how the defence team was harrassed during the Pirojpur visit for PO visit.

11.27 am – Reply of the Prosecution

H/A – There is no law to file the first two application at this stage. So the applications are not maintainable in law. After our serving these documents the defence filed application for ineligible documents. At that time this tribunal asked us to provide those documents. We provided clear copies of those documents. So the matter of serving document is already decided. There is no further scope to file the first two applications.

HA – the seizure list documents are seized materials and we are not supposed to give seized materials at this stage. The law does not allow them. These applications are only to delay the proceeding of the case.

HA – with regard to the adjournment application – defence lawyer are now saying that they did not get protection in Pirojpur. But we have information that the defence lawyers went to our prosecution witness and threatened them. They went their will procession of thousands people and had political meeting. We have information that the concerned person has filed a general diary in the relevant Police Station in Pirojpur against the defence counsels and we are considering filing application in this regard to the Tribunal. This matter should be referred to the Bar Council.

HA – all the Applications are illegal and must be rejected. The defence referred some decisions in their application. But this may not be relevant as we did not get chance to check them.

Ch – can we pass direction upon the law enforcing agencies for protection of the Defence counsel?

HA – the Defence Counsel can apply to the relevant authority and there is no provision under which the Tribunal can pass such an order.

11.45 am – TI’s Reply

TI – the prosecution is making false allegation of threat to PW agaisnt defence lawyer. We are in fear that they may file false case against the defence counsel. The Defence counsel should be allowed to work fearlessly. We are here to assist the tribunal. We need protection from Tribunal.

TI – we are entitled to get the exculpatory evidence, seizure list documents and the Investigation Report. TI read out rules 18, 29, 35 and argued that since these documents are considered by the tribunal at the time of taking cognizance, framing of charge and will be used during trial against the Accused Petitioner, he is entitled to these papers and documents for preparation of defence.

TI – We must visit the places of occurrences to be able to cross the PWs. So the matter should be adjourned and the defence counsel should be allowed to visit the places with police protection.

11.55 am – Order of the Tribunal: (Chairman)

The Defence filed three applications.

1. Disclosure for exculpatory materials;
   
2. Disclosure of seizure list documents and Investigation Reprot;
   
3. Application praying 3 relieves –
   
   1. Protection of Defence team for Pirojpur Visit
      
   2. Adjournment
      
   3. Fixing another date for submitting list of defence witnesses and documents
      

We have heard TI and HA and parused the application, rules and the Act. We have repeatedly said that this tribunal must follow the Act. Section 9 (3) provides “—-entire section—-”. Section 16(2) of the Act provides “—–entire section——”.

Upon perusal of the sections of the Act it is clear that what document is to be supplied and how long time the defence will get for preparation of defence. We found that the prosecution did submit all the documents and the Accused could not make out a case for the first two applications and as such they stand rejected.

For the 3^rd application it was stated that the defence counsel did not get protection from proper authority during their Pirojpur visit. All the citizens of the country are entitled to get protection. The Superintendent of Police upon the prayer is to decide what protection to be given. Regarding the prayer for time to submit list of defence witnesses and documents though they were given sufficient time for that but they failed submit that until now. We allow some more time to the accused to submit the witness list and documents within one week on 14^th December 2011 as last chance.

Call the prosecution witnesses.

TI – since this Tribunal allowed one week for defence to submit documents and witness list the PW recording should start from that day. We still do not know the mode of recording.

Ch – the Prosecution Witness (PW) should start now. Regarding mode of recording you can see that there are monitor in defence and prosecution table and near the judges. The testimoney will be typed by court officer and that will appear in those screens. You may object for incorrect recording. We are trying to audio record the depositions but the facilities are not prepared today. We hope that it can be prepared tomorrow. For the purpose of witness protection the PW will only say their name and will not disclose their father’s name and address.

TI – we should get type copy of the Statements at the end of each day.

Ch – you should make application for certified copies at the end of each day and will get it hand to hand.

12.10 pm – PW-1 Mahbub Alam Hawlader entered the witness doc.

Chair was arranged for him.

12.14 pm

PW-1 took oath

Prosecution S. Rahman (SR) took the chief (Please see the attached file)

1.10 pm the proceeding was adjourned for lunch until 2.00 pm.

2.05 pm – Proceeding restarted

HA – there are three people in the court room namely (1) Naser Mollik (one possible defence witness and Sayedee’s nephew), (2) Mr. Saleh (Sayedee’s Nephew), (3) Mostofa Sayedee (Sayedee’s younger brother). Our PW’s are in fear to talk in front of these persons. They should be removed from the court room.

Ch – called those three persons who stood up. Do you have permission to enter the tribunal.

3 persons – yes we got entry pass from the office of the tribunal.

Ch called the Deputy registrar to check that who replied that he had no knowledge about how and who issue entry pass.

Ch – the PWs are in fear to talk in front of you. Can you all 3 please leave the court room.

3 person left the court room.

Sayedee – I want to talk something. These are my relatives. Why they cannot stay during the court proceeding.

Ch – PWs are in fear of them.

Sayedee – if PW’s are telling the truth then why should be fear of anybody.

2.15 pm – PW-1 entered the doc and continued until 3.30 pm. (his statements are attached)

3.30 pm

Examination in chief ended and defence was asked to cross.

TI – Since we have no knowledge of the places of occurrences as stated by this PW we are not in a position to cross him. The proceeding may adjourn for today and we should be allowed police protection during this weak end on Friday and Saturday for visit of Places of occurrences and we may cross this PW on Sunday.

Ch after discussing with his members – we may allow you for cross of this PW on Sunday. But we will have to start examination in chief of PW-2 now. We cannot sit ideal for rest of the day and tomorrow.

HA – the defence should be asked to Cross this witness now.

Ch – can we take examination in chief of PW-2 and continue for tomorrow. We can take the chief of PW-3 tomorrow and allow the defence to cross them on Sunday.

HA – OK.

Ch – Call PW-2

3.40 pm – PW-2 Ruhul Amin Nobin entered the doc

PW-2 took oath. (his examination in chief will be given later on)

3.55pm

The proceeding Adjourn for tomorrow.

TI – We need type copy of today’s recording. Here is our application.

Ch – you can get it tomorrow.

TI – but you said that we would get that at the end of the day.

Ch – today is first day of recording of witnesses and so take it tomorrow.

TI – but we need them today.

Ch – don’t worry, you will get it tomorrow.

TI – Can you please pass a formal order regarding protection of the prosecution witnesses.

Ch – Ok we will pass this.

Bangladesh Government makes ICT controversial An exclusive interview with Toby Cadman

New York (ANS) – Toby Cadman, eminent British lawyer with an expertise to deal with war crimes and crimes against humanity has said the government of Bangladesh and the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) should work in a way so that it does not give an idea that they are trying some people because of political opposition. There is a conception that the government is only targeting people from opposition parties. So it may be deemed as politically motivated exercise. The point we are trying to make repeatedly that if the government wants to make its standard as international as repeatedly said by the government ministers, if they are serious in holding the trial in international standard, they have to implement the recommendations made by the Ambassador-at-Large on War Crimes of the State Department of the US Stephan J Rapp, International Bar Association, Amnesty International, Center for Transitional Justice and others, if they can convince the world that they are not conducting trials with a political motive, they can go ahead.

But they themselves made it controversial by making open comments that these are politically motivated. My attention draws to one recent comment by State Minister for Law Kamrul Islam as he said this would be the model for the rest of the world, this would be the best tribunal in the world. If it is the case, then implement international standard, allow foreign counsel to appear, allow international observers to monitor the trial, reinstate the constitutional protections that means amendment to the 1^st and 15^th amendment to the constitution, ensure application of Criminal Procedure Act and Criminal Evidence Act in the ICT procedure and show the world how this can be done.

He said this in an exclusive interview at his Manhattan hotel suite on November 16, 2011 with Atlantic News Service (ANS) while he was on a trip to New York, USA. Referring to his experience, he said it is indeed very difficult to hold trial in a fair manner in the country where the crimes were committed. It is almost impossible. Bosnia was not capable of doing that because there was deep rooted animosity between the ethnic groups. To ensure international participation and keeping the court free from fear and emotion a third country is better place to conduct such trial.

Toby Cadman is a barrister in Chambers at 9 Bedford Row, London, is a lead defense counsel for the accused Jamaat-i-Islami leader, who are facing charges for their alleged connections in crimes against humanity during the Bangladesh’s liberation war in 1971. Two other members of the three-member team, who are working as advisers to the Bangladeshi defense counsels for Jamaat leaders as they were not given permission by the Bangladesh Bar Council to appear before the (ICT). Toby, who worked as a prosecutor in Bosnian war crimes tribunal, was denied entry to Bangladesh in early August 2011, which created problem to directly interact with the defense counsels.

Toby said that Bangladesh has the opportunity to show the world that in a domestic setting trial of international standard can be conducted. In that case the International Crimes tribunal (ICT) of Bangladesh has to ensure that it is sufficiently capable in conducting these cases with the standard of the International Criminal Court (ICC). He said, if the government is insistent that Bangladesh will be a model for the rest of the world in dealing with such cases then the judges of the ICT should be assisted by international advisers, the prosecutors should have international assistance and the government should implement the recommendations made by Mr Stephan J Rapp, Ambassador-at-Large on war crimes affairs of the US State Department.

When asked whether he and two other members of his team broke the code of conduct by suggesting the chairman of the ICT to step down for his earlier involvement in an enquiry against Jamaat leader Moulana Sayedee and introducing themselves as counsels for Sayedee, Toby said that we have been made accused by the International Crimes tribunal of Bangladesh of breaching our code of conduct in the United Kingdom. I have read the ICT order. I do not want to say too much about the process as they are yet to write to the Bar Standard Board. But we did not break any code of conduct as we are very much within our professional line.

Toby said adding in the ICT regulations there are provisions of allowing foreign counsels, but it requires permission of the Bangladesh Bar Council, which has earlier refused to allow me and my colleagues to appear in these cases. So our role is to advise the Bangladeshi counsels of our clients, who are leaders of the Jamaat-i-Islami party. As I was not allowed to Bangladesh, it has become difficult to directly advise our clients

Referring to his experience in dealing with ware crimes cases in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Toby Cadman said, I have spent most of my time in Bosnia where I was on the prosecution side, although primarily I was on the defence side. In Bosnia, the court was domestic, but with international assistance. So there were international judges and prosecutors. These courts were set up to try both military and civilian personnel. During the armed conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina and indeed the whole region of former Yugoslavia, there were military tribunals. After the end of the war the international community brokered a peace deal. It was deemed inappropriate for cases done by the military courts. So they had created civilian courts to deal with these cases. And the state court in Bosnia with the highest jurisdiction level which would try both civilian and military personnel who were involved in actions during the conflicts. Ordinarily in dealing with cases of such gravity and sensitivity, it generally concerns the actions taken by the military personnel, but there will of course civilian personnel to be charged with such crimes. In Bangladesh, the scenario is quite different and in our view very problematic. The tribunal and the legislation was not for setting up of a civilian court. The legislation was targeted to set up a military tribunal with the intention to try 195 Pakistani military personnel. It subsequently became a court that would try civilians, military and auxiliary forces. There is nothing wrong in doing that and trying civilians. But the problem is the legislation itself. You have to keep in mind and consider the time of the legislation. The 1973 Act under which the present ICT was set up, was not drafted with the intention of trying civilians, but to try military personnel. If the 1973 Act was effectively torn up to start anew and a new Act is drafted and also set new rules, in our view then that would be a sensible way to dealing with the cases. One of the criticisms was that you can tear up a legislation, all laws have retrospective effect and there is a principle in the international law that a person cannot be charged, tried or convicted with a law that was not applicable at the time of committing crimes. But there are exceptions also that the crimes that are international in nature recognized by the international community, such as war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity and you cannot have a retrospective law in these events. The 1973 Act is retrospective anyway as the crimes were committed in 1971 not in 1973.

Responding to a question whether it is possible for the ICT to maintain international standard in conducting cases of such gravity, Toby said, we have also raised our newest concerns as to the Act itself, the rules of procedure and the ICT legislation. One thing is very important that the ICT has to be either national or international. You cannot something in the middle. If it is an international tribunal, there would be international assistance, there would be compliance with international standard and that tribunal would have to incorporate general fair trial procedure as recognized under international law. But the ICT does not. It does not accept international law, does not consider the activities of any international tribunal. So the question is raised that is it then a domestic court? The related laws of Bangladesh are excluded in dealing with cases before the ICT. The Criminal Procedure Act and the Criminal Evidence Act are excluded, the constitutional protections are also excluded. With the exception of appealing against conviction sentence there is no right to make interlocutory appeal. There is no right to appearing to a higher court of a decision of the ICT judges. One cannot challenge the jurisdiction of the ICT. In that sense you cannot say that it is a domestic or national court. So question comes, what is it? They said that it is a combination of two. But it cannot be, you have to be one or the other.

When asked how the ICT would go ahead without testimony of eye witnesses and reliable documentary evidence as the charges are being framed based on newspaper clippings and literature, Toby said that war crimes cases are often very difficult, because of the sources of the evidence that are available. There are very little documentary evidence and even little live testimony by way of direct identification of those. War crimes tribunal works on hearsay, by second and third hand evidence, which made it difficult. In Bangladesh, it is even more complicated and difficult as the incident took place 40 years ago, but that does not mean that you lower the standard of evidence. One of the comments made at a seminar when I visited Bangladesh last time in January, that you cannot expect trial of international standard from the ICT. That does necessarily mean that you can lower the standard of evidence. You cannot reasonably convict an individual based on rumor. If we just rely on literature, newspaper clippings, it is not going to give a satisfactory decision. But the judges ultimately have to rule on those evidence.

He further said, it will of course be a challenge for the tribunal, because we are looking at complex crimes forty years late. Lot of evidence may have been destroyed, lot of evidence will have in the hands of Pakistan military, many evidence will be in the hands of Indian military and those are not going to be available to the tribunal, and that is a shame and Bangladesh loses an opportunity to end an impunity and the victims of the war of liberation will not get justice. What is crucial to mention that we are not suggesting that crimes did not occur, we are not suggesting that victims on a large scale did not suffer. Everybody know that a conflict had occurred and many people were suffered, there may be dispute with the actual number as it happen in any conflict, but the truth is the crimes had occurred.

On a question about involvement of Jamaat leaders in committing crimes against humanity in 1971, Toby replied that the point is that our clients are not connected to these crimes as they had not been in a position to do so in 1971. They were in the political opposition at that time and the trial will show that. There was a pre-judgment in the media due to their political objective. But still we hope to see that the tribunal will conduct trials based on evidence maintaining the principle of fair trial and not on the basis of rumor. The legality of the judgment and the sentences of the tribunal will be judged by the fairness of the trial process. If the trial is fair and credible, then one can justify the judgment.

As it happened in many instances that innocent people got punished for crimes committed by others due to absence of proper evidence, whether their clients are going to face the same fate, Toby Cadman said, when a tribunal has the jurisdiction to sentence one person to death then the standard of evidence should be higher and authenticity should be beyond any doubt, because of the ultimate sanction. It is worrying when the ICT is dealing with direct death. Although there is no direct identification by an eye witness that cannot be said that the trial was not fair. In absence of eye witnesses a trial can be fair on the basis of other compelling evidence. We have such cases all the time. In Sebrenitza, I was involved with a case in which the Yugoslav army killed 8,500 Bosnian Muslims and very effectively ensured elimination of all the surviving legacies. So how do you justify that there was no direct evidence. There are other evidence to determine a person’s guilt. If other forms of evidence are satisfactory, which are very high standard that can work. Obviously, it depends on proper assessment of the evidence. I am deeply opposed to death penalty in any form and any circumstances. In the United Kingdom, we have abolished death penalty long ago. Our efforts are on to abolish death penalty from the European countries, those still have such laws.

When asked how a trial can be fair when the prime accused 195 identified war criminal were kept out of the jurisdiction of the ICT and only their collaborators are being accused, Toby said, we have come across similar questions many times that why people at the top were not brought to justice when courts deal with crimes of such gravity. Legally there is no wrong in prosecuting only people at the bottom and not bringing top brasses to justice. It is totally a prosecutory decision. You select those cases that you most likely to prosecute. Those were on the top are unreachable, they are in Pakistan and not available. So it is better to target the people at the bottom, you pick those who are easier to pick and don’t go to the top. It has become the transitional justice issue that you are not dealing with the real problem. It is a dangerous matter and dangerous for long-term, because you are not dealing with the root of the problem. It is not wrong, but not sensible. The ICT can do nothing to it as it was not set up to resolve the real problem.

Besides, Toby said, our statement was controversial as we had mentioned that the Presidential Decree 16 stopped trial of members of liberation war side for their alleged crimes, they can never be tried. It is obviously not said they have committed crimes, but some of them may have done. There are commentary and literature that suggests that crimes were committed on all sides. If you want to establish a fair process, then you have to bring all sides to be prosecuted. When I pointed this out, I have been told not to say it again.

Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal Remarks Stephen J. Rapp Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues

Dhaka, Bangladesh

November 28, 2011

Embassy of the United States of America
Public Affairs Section
Tel: 880-2-885-55-00
Fax: 880-2-9881677, 9885688
E-mail: DhakaPA@state.gov​
Website: http://dhaka.usembassy.gov

---

As prepared for delivery

This is my third visit this year to Bangladesh to learn about your International Crimes Tribunal and to offer ideas to ensure that the trials it holds will be fair and open.

I know of the horrible crimes committed in the country in 1971-- of the hundreds of thousands of victims who were murdered and raped, of the pain inflicted and the property destroyed. The victims of these crimes deserve justice, and those accused of these acts deserve trials where they can test the evidence and present witnesses on their own behalf. Those who are innocent should be found not guilty and be freed. Those who are responsible for these crimes should be found guilty and punished. Given the historic importance of these trials to Bangladesh, the region, and the world, the proceedings should be conducted in a manner that is open and accessible to all.

In March, I made a number of suggestions on how the rules for these trials could be amended to ensure fair and transparent proceedings. Some of these suggestions were incorporated in amendments adopted in June. I regret to say that many were not.
Now the first trial has begun with the opening statements of the prosecution last week, and with witnesses due to begin testifying on December 7.

The focus of my present visit is on how the International Crimes Tribunal will conduct these trials. The statute and the rules are in place; the question now is how they will be interpreted in actual practice. Much can still be accomplished to ensure that justice is done and is seen to be done in these historic proceedings.

First, it is important that the judges, at the first opportunity, define what “crimes against humanity” means. The term "crimes against humanity" has been defined in the statutes and cases of international courts. It has not been defined in Bangladesh. In their charge framing order in the first case, the judges said that they would interpret the statute according to Bangladesh law but look for additional guidance in the decisions of international tribunals. But it is not clear whether the prosecution must prove whether the alleged murders and rapes were committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against a civilian population; whether they were committed on a racial, religious, or political basis; whether the alleged perpetrators would need to have knowledge of the larger attack. At other courts, the elements of the crimes have been defined by the judges in an early ruling. The same can be done here.

Second, it is important that the same rights be accorded to these accused as are guaranteed to Bangladeshi citizens who are charged with other violent crimes. The Bangladesh constitution and laws provided that this was to be a special court responsible for its own rules and procedures. As the judges have amended the rules to incorporate concepts like the presumption of innocence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt, it is also important that they conduct these trials to ensure that the accused have the same right to consult with their counsel, the same time and ability to prepare their defense, and the same time and ability to challenge the process as they would have in other cases.

Third, while the rules amendments provided for the protection of witnesses, it is important that a system of protection of witnesses be developed in practice and available to both sides. In the first trial, witnesses for the prosecution have already been listed. The defense must file a list of witnesses by December 7. Witness protection measures must be in effect to ensure that those willing to come forth and tell the truth will not be subject to threats and intimidation.

Finally, and most importantly, the process must be accessible to all. It is not easy for members of the public to attend court sessions. Ideally, the trial sessions should be broadcast on television or radio, or weekly reports be aired that would show key testimony, arguments, and rulings. This is being done now in the trials in Cambodia of those alleged to be responsible for the atrocities committed in that country in the 1970s. If this is not possible in Bangladesh, neutral observers should be permitted to follow the trials and produce daily and weekly reports that would be available through the internet and other media.

These trials are of great importance to the victims of these horrible crimes. What happens here will send a message to others who would commit these crimes anywhere in the world that it is possible for a national system to bring those responsible to justice.
I am here because the people of the United States wish to help ensure that this is a process that is fair and transparent. We will continue to work with all those involved in this process to achieve justice in these historic trials.

http://www.state.gov/s/wci/us_releases/remarks/177811.htm

A War Crimes Court and a Travesty of Justice

by – NYTimes.com

DHAKA, Bangladesh — On the fourth floor of a nondescript pale-blue government building in Old Dhaka, clerks are stapling together copies of depositions from witnesses to the crimes committed during Bangladesh’s 1971 war of secession from Pakistan — a conflict that may have killed up to three million people, according to the Bangladeshi government. Above them on the wall is a map showing the 11 sectors of what was then called East Pakistan.

Strdel/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesDelwar Hossain Sayedee, a leading cleric of Bangladesh’s Islamist party, Jamaat-e-Islami, at the International Crimes Tribunal in Dhaka in November.

In the office next door sits Abdul Hannan Khan, the chief investigator for the International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh, a court set up by the Bangladeshi government in March 2010 to “try and punish any individual or group of individuals, or any member of any armed, defence or auxiliary forces, irrespective of his nationality” who committed crimes against humanity, genocide, and war crimes, among other things, in 1971. Khan, a former police inspector general, is an affable man, in control and in no rush, who seems remarkably uninterested in politics. He says that his agency has finished investigating seven people. On Nov. 20th, the first of them, Delwar Hossain Sayedee, a leader of Jamaat-e-Islami, an Islamist party opposed to Bangladesh’s independence, was charged with a slew of crimes. He will soon be joined in the dock by nearly the entire Jamaat leadership, including its former chief, the 89-year old Ghulam Azam, and two prominent members of the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).

No trial has yet taken place, but it already seems clear that the International Crimes Tribunal is an international tribunal in name only. Its exclusive focus on the Bangladeshis who bloodied their hands assisting the main perpetrators — the Pakistani military — makes the court look like an government appendage eager to settle a domestic score. Trying and punishing members of the former Pakistani Army is too sensitive politically for the current Bangladeshi government to even contemplate: it could cause a complete breakdown in relations with Pakistan. It would also be impractical, because there is no extradition treaty between Bangladesh and Pakistan.

More arrests are sure to follow. Khan is investigating 10 other suspected collaborators, including another six members of the Jamaat and two of the BNP. There is also Ashrafuzzaman Khan, an American, and Moinuddin Chowdhury, a British citizen, both alleged leaders of the pro-army paramilitary body called Al Badr, which massacred Bengali intellectuals in December 1971. Khan says that Khan lives in New York and Chowdhury in “UK, London.” Their being far away might seem like a serious obstacle, but according to one political analyst (who wishes not to be identified), even those cases will be a “slam dunk” because the two men will probably be tried — and convicted — in absentia.

The tribunal is shaping up to be a travesty of justice. The government seems to be using the court simply to rubberstamp a predetermination that the accused are guilty. For most Bangladeshis, that truth has been established since 1995, when a self-appointed panel of eminent citizens, headed by the current justice minister, compiled “evidence” of war crimes against 16 individuals, including the seven men currently awaiting trial before the International Crimes Tribunal. The Jamaat members’ defense team has asked one of the judges to step down because he sat on the 1995 panel. If, as is nonetheless expected, nearly the entire leadership of the Jamaat is convicted and hanged within two years, the Bangladeshi opposition will be conveniently weakened in time for the next parliamentary election in 2013.

Such a nakedly partisan exercise of justice would make it much harder for an accurate history of Bangladesh’s birth to ever be written. According to M. A. Hasan, of the War Crimes Fact Finding Committee, an independent body investigating the 1971 massacres, 95 percent of the atrocities were committed by Pakistani soldiers who resisted secession — and were under orders to kill to prevent it — on the theory that the Islamic unity of the two wings of Pakistan must not be compromised.

Yet none of them will be in court. Nor will any member of the pro-independence militias be charged for massacring tens of thousands of Bihari migrants who sympathized with Pakistan. The current list of accused looks so conveniently expedient for the Awami League of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina that for the sake of appearance alone Hasina might have better served herself, and Bangladesh, by making a greater show of endorsing an independent war crimes trial subject to international standards. The defense teams do count some high-caliber international lawyers, but the government has effectively barred them from being present in court by making it hard for them to even get into the country.

In the midst of all the politicking, Hasan has somehow managed to adopt an impartial position. A few years back, he submitted to the government a list of 1,775 suspected war criminals, including the accused currently on trial but also collaborators from the Awami League’s coalition partners and members of the former Pakistani military. At the end of a visit to his office last Tuesday, during which he bemoaned continued impunity, Hasan produced what he called a “genocide map” of Dhaka. It showed 48 mass graves, with latitudes and longitudes.

source:http://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/a-war-crimes-court-and-a-travesty-of-justice/

যুক্তরাষ্ট্রের যুদ্ধাপরাধ বিষয়ক রাষ্ট্রদূত স্টিফেন জে. র‌্যাপের বক্তব্য

প্রেস কনফারেন্স

ঢাকা রিপোর্টার্স’ ইউনিটি

২৮শে নভেম্বর, ২০১১





ঢাকা, ২৮শে নভেম্বর – সফররত যুক্তরাষ্ট্রের যুদ্ধাপরাধ বিষয়ক রাষ্ট্রদূত স্টিফেন জে র‌্যাপ আজ, সোমবার, ২৮শে নভেম্বর ঢাকায় এক সংবাদ সম্মেলনে নিম্মোক্ত বক্তব্য প্রদান করেন।

(বক্তৃতা শুর”)

আপনাদের আন্তর্জাতিক যুদ্ধাপরাধ ট্রাইব্যুনাল সম্পর্কে জানতে এবং যে বিচারকাজ শুর” হয়েছে তার নিরপেক্ষতা ও স্বচ্ছতা নিশ্চিত করতে করণীয় বিষয়ে মতামত জানাতে বাংলাদেশে এটি এ বছরে আমার ত”তীয় সফর।

১৯৭১ সালে কী ধরনের জঘন্য অপরাধ এখানে সংঘটিত হয়েছিল সে বিষয়ে আমার ধারণা রয়েছে। আমি জানি সে সময় হাজার হাজার ভুক্তভোগীকে হত্যা করা হয়েছে কিংবা তারা ধর্ষিত হয়েছেন, কী যন্ত্রণার ভিতর দিয়ে তারা দিনাতিপাত করেছেন এবং কত বাড়িঘর ও সম্পত্তি ধ্বংস হয়েছে। এ ধরনের অপরাধের ভুক্তভোগীদের বিচার পাওয়ার অধিকার রয়েছে এবং যারা এ ধরনের অপরাধের জন্য অভিযুক্ত হয়েছেন তাদেরও অধিকার রয়েছে তাদের বির”দ্ধে প্রমাণাদির যথার্থতা যাচাই করার এবং নিজেদের পক্ষে সাক্ষ্য-প্রমাণ হাজির করবার। যারা নির্দোষ, এ প্রক্রিয়ায় তাদের নিরাপরাধতা প্রমাণিত হওয়া উচিত এবং তাদেরকে মুক্তি দেয়া উচিত। আর যারা এ ধরনের অপরাধের জন্য দায়ী তাদেরকে দোষী সাব্যস্ত করে শাস্তি প্রদান করা উচিৎ। বাংলাদেশে, এ অঞ্চল এবং বিশ্বব্যাপী এই বিচারের ঐতিহাসিক গুর”ত্ব বিবেচনায়, এমনভাবে এই বিচারকার্য পরিচালনা করা উচিত যাতে তা স্বচ্ছ হয় এবং সবার জন্য উন্মুক্ত থাকে।

এই বিচার প্রক্রিয়ার নিরপেক্ষতা ও স্বচ্ছতা নিশ্চিত করতে গত মার্চ মাসে আমি এই বিচারকাজের ধারাসমূহের সংশোধনীর জন্য কিছু প্রস্তাব রেখেছিলাম। এসব প্রস্তাবনার কিছু জুন মাসে গ”হীত সংশোধনীতে অন্তর্ভুক্ত করা হয়েছে। তবে আমি দুঃখের সাথে বলতে চাই যে এগুলোর মধ্য থেকে আরো অনেকগুলো বিষয় যোগ করা সম্ভব ছিল।

গত সপ্তাহে বিচার প্রক্রিয়ার প্রারম্ভিক বক্তব্যের মাধ্যমে এখন প্রথম বিচার কাজ শুর” হয়েছে এবং আগামী ৭ই ডিসেম্বর থেকে এর সাক্ষ্য গ্রহণ শুর” হবে।

আমার বর্তমান সফরের মূল উদ্দেশ্য হলো আন্তর্জাতিক যুদ্ধাপরাধ ট্রাইবুনাল কিভাবে এই বিচারকাজ পরিচালনা করবে তা জানা। সংবিধি ও ধারাগুলো তৈরী করা আছে; এখন প্রশ্ন হচ্ছে কীভাবে ওগুলো বাস্তবে প্রয়োগ করা হবে। এই ঐতিহাসিক বিচার প্রক্রিয়ার জন্য ন্যায় বিচার নিশ্চিত করা এবং তা করতে দেখার এখনো অনেক কিছুই করার বাকি রয়েছে।

প্রথমত, এটা গুর”ত্বপূর্ণ যে বিচারকদের প্রথম সুযোগেই “মানবতার বির”দ্ধে অপরাধ” বিষয়টি সংজ্ঞায়িত করা উচিত। “মানবতার বির”দ্ধে অপরাধ” — বিষয়টি আন্তর্জাতিক আদালতের সংবিধি ও বিভিন্ন মামলার মাধ্যমে সংজ্ঞায়িত করা হয়েছে। কিন্থ বাংলাদেশে এ বিষয়টি এখনো কোনো সংজ্ঞায় ফেলা হয়নি। প্রথম মামলার অভিযোগ গঠন প্রক্রিয়ায় বিচারকরা বলেছিলেন যে তারা বাংলাদেশের আইন অনুযায়ী এই সংবিধি প্রয়োগ করবেন এবং আন্তর্জাতিক ট্রাইব্যুনালের বিভিন্ন সিদ্ধান্তের মধ্য দিয়ে তারা দিক নির্দেশনা খোঁজার চেষ্টা করবেন। তবে, অভিযুক্ত হত্যা ও ধর্ষণগুলো কি একটি নাগরিক গোষ্ঠীর বিস্তৃত ও প্রক্রিয়াগত আক্রমণের অংশ হিসেবে করা হয়েছিলো, নাকি সেগুলো কোনো বর্ণবাদ, ধর্মবাদ কিংবা রাজনৈতিক উদ্দেশ্যের কারণে করা হয়েছিলো নাকি আবার অভিযুক্ত আসামীদের এই বিশাল আক্রমণ সম্বন্ধে কোনো তথ্য বা জ্ঞান থাকার প্রয়োজন ছিলো কি না, এগুলোর মধ্যে কোন বিষয়টি বিচার প্রক্রিয়ায় প্রমাণ করতে হবে সে বিষয়টিও পরিষ্কার নয়। সংঘটিত অপরাধ সংশ্লিষ্ট যেসব বিষয়গুলো প্রমাণ করতে হবে সেগুলো অন্যান্য আদালতে বিচারকরা পূর্ববর্তী রায়ের মাধ্যমে নির্ধারণ করেছেন। এখানেও একইভাবে কাজটি করা যেতে পারে।

দ্বিতীয়ত, অন্যান্য মারাত্মক অপরাধে আরোপিত বাংলাদেশী নাগরিকগণ যেসব অধিকার নিশ্চিতভাবে উপভোগ করবে, এই অভিযুক্তদেরও সেই অধিকারগুলো চর্চার সুযোগ দেয়াটা গুর”ত্বপূর্ণ। বাংলাদেশের সংবিধান ও আইন এ বিষয়ে সম্মতি জানায় যে এটা একটি বিশেষ আদালত যা নিজস্ব ধারা ও প্রক্রিয়াসমূহের জন্য নিজেই দায়ী। বিচারকরা ধারাগুলোর সংস্কার করে ‘অভিযুক্তদের দোষী সাব্যস্ত হওয়ার আগে নির্দোষ হিসেবে বিবেচিত হওয়া‘ এবং ‘যুক্তিসঙ্গত দ্বিধা-সন্দেহের উর্ধ্বে প্রমাণ’ ধারণাগুলো সংযোজন করেছেন। একইসঙ্গে, এই বিচারকাজ যেন এমনভাবে পরিচালিত হয় যাতে অভিযুক্তরা তাদের আইনজীবীদের সঙ্গে পরামর্শ করার সমঅধিকার, নিজের রক্ষার্থে মামলা প্রস্থতির জন্য সমপরিমাণ সময় ও দক্ষতা এবং অন্যান্য মামলার ক্ষেত্রে যেমন হতো ঠিক তেমনিভাবে এই প্রক্রিয়াকেও চ্যালেঞ্জ করার মতো সময় ও দক্ষতা উপভোগ ও ব্যবহারের সুযোগ পায় সে বিষয়টাও নিশ্চিত করাটা গুর”ত্বপূর্ণ।

তৃতীয়ত, ধারাসমূহ সংস্কারের মাধ্যমে সাক্ষীদের নিরাপত্তার সুযোগ হলেও এটা গুর”ত্বপূর্ণ যে এমন একটি সাক্ষী নিরাপত্তা প্রক্রিয়া গড়ে তুলতে হবে যা উভয়পক্ষ ব্যবহারের সুযোগ পায়। প্রথম বিচার প্রক্রিয়ায় সাক্ষীদের নামের তালিকা ইতিমধ্যে লিপিবদ্ধ করা হয়েছে। বিবাদীকেও ৭ই ডিসেম্বরের মধ্যে সাক্ষীদের একটি তালিকা অবশ্যই জমা দিতে হবে। সাক্ষী নিরাপত্তা ব্যবস্থায় গ”হীত পদক্ষেপগুলো এমনভাবে কার্যকর করতে হবে যাতে যারা এগিয়ে এসে সত্য কথা বলতে চায় তারা যেন কোনো হুমকি ও ভয়-ভীতির শিকার না হয়।

সর্বশেষ এবং সবচাইতে গুর”ত্বপূর্ণ যে বিষয় তা হলো — এই বিচার প্রক্রিয়ায় কি ঘটছে তা সবাইকে জানাতে হবে। সাধারণ জনগণের পক্ষে এই আদালতের অধিবেশনে যোগ দেয়া সহজ ও সম্ভব নয়। আদর্শতগভাবে, সবচাইতে ভালো হতো যদি এই বিচার প্রক্রিয়ার অধিবেশনসমূহ টেলিভিশন বা রেডিও-তে সরাসরি সম্প্রচার করা হতো। অথবা সপ্তাহিক প্রতিবেদন প্রচার করা হতো যেখানে মূল সাক্ষ্য, যুক্ততর্ক, এবং র”লিং দেখানো হতো। ১৯৭০-এর দশকে ক্যাম্বোডিয়ায় যুদ্ধ চলাকালে সংঘটিত নিষ্ঠুরতার জন্য যারা দায়ী বলে যারা অভিযুক্ত হয়েছেন, বর্তমানে সে দেশটিতে যুদ্ধাপরাধী বিচারকাজে এই প্রক্রিয়া অবলম্বন করা হচ্ছে। বাংলাদেশে যদি তা সম্ভব না হয়, তাহলে নিরপেক্ষ পর্যবেক্ষকদেরকে এই বিচার প্রক্রিয়া অনুসরণ করার অনুমোদন দেয়া উচিত যাতে করে তারা প্রাত্যহিক ও সাপ্তাহিক প্রতিবেদন তৈরি করতে পারেন যা ইন্টারনেট ও অন্যান্য সংবাদ মাধ্যম দ্বারা সবার কাছে পৌঁছাতে পারে।

এই ন”শংস অপরাধের যারা শিকার হয়েছিলেন, তাদের কাছে এই বিচার প্রক্রিয়া অত্যন্ত গুর”ত্বপূর্ণ। এইখানে যা ঘটবে, বিশ্বের সর্বত্র যারা এধরনের অপরাধের সাথে জড়িত তাদের জন্য এটি এই বার্তা পৌঁছে দেবে যে এধরনের অপরাধের জন্য যারা দায়ী — একটি রাষ্ট্র ব্যবস্থার পক্ষে সম্ভব তাদের বিচারের ব্যবস্থা করা।

আমি এখানে এসেছি কারণ যুক্তরাষ্ট্রের জনগণ এটা নিশ্চিত করতে চায় যে এই বিচার প্রক্রিয়াটি স্বচ্ছ ও নিশ্চিত হচ্ছে। এই ঐতিহাসিক বিচার প্রক্রিয়া ন্যায় বিচার অর্জনের জন্য এই প্রক্রিয়া সঙ্গে যারা জড়িত তাদের সকলের সাথেই আমরা কাজ করা অব্যাহত রাখবো।

==================





* বক্তৃতার জন্য প্রস্থতকৃত







জিআর/২০১১

যুদ্ধাপরাধ ট্রাইবুনাল থেকে সুবিচার পাওয়ার সুযোগ নেই : ব্যারিস্টার আব্দুর রাজ্জাক

বাংলাদেশে যুদ্ধাপরাধের বিচার প্রক্রিয়া এবং ট্রাইবুনালের বিচারপতির প্রতি অভিযুক্তদের অনাস্থা এবং যুদ্ধাপরাধ সম্পর্কিত’ আইনের নানা দিক নিয়ে আমরা কথা বলেছি, বাংলাদেশের বিশিষ্ট আইনজীবী ব্যারিস্টার আব্দুর রাজ্জাকের সাথে।
পূর্ণাঙ্গ সাক্ষাৎকারটি এখানে উপস্থাপন করা হল

রেডিও তেহরান : যুদ্ধাপরাধ ট্রাইবুনাল নিয়ে এমনকি গোটা বিচার প্রক্রিয়া নিয়ে ইতিমধ্যে অনেকেই কথা বলছেন। প্রধান বিরোধী দল বিএনপি’র নেত্রী বেগম খালেদা জিয়া বিচার প্রক্রিয়া নিয়ে প্রশ্ন তুলেছেন, তো আমরা জানতে চাচ্ছি, কেন এবং সুনির্দিষ্ট কোন কোন বিষয়ের কারণে ট্রাইবুনাল এবং বিচার প্রক্রিয়া নিয়ে প্রশ্ন উঠছে?

ব্যারিস্টার আব্দুর রাজ্জাক :দেখুন, যুদ্ধাপরাধ বিষয়ক ট্রাইবুনালের বিচার প্রক্রিয়া নিয়ে কয়েকটি কারণে প্রশ্ন উঠেছে।
প্রথমত : বলা যায়, যে আইনের মাধ্যমে বিচার প্রক্রিয়া অনুষ্ঠিত হচ্ছে সেই আইন আন্তর্জাতিক মানের অনেক নীচে। শুধু আন্তর্জাতিক মানের অনেক নীচেই না ; বাংলাদেশে যেসব আইন রয়েছে বা আন্তর্জাতিক যেসব আইনে বাংলাদেশ স্বাক্ষর করেছে সেসব আইনেরও অনেকে নীচে এই আইন।
দ্বিতীয়ত: হচ্ছে বাংলাদেশে বহুবিধ আইন আছে, যেমন- বাংলাদেশের সংবিধান আছে, এছাড়া বাংলাদেশের সাক্ষ্য আইন আছে,ফৌজদারী কার্যবিধি আছে। এসব আইন আমাদের দেশের আইন। এই আইনগুলোও এখানে প্রযোজ্য নয়। সুতরাং এই যুদ্ধাপরাধ ট্রাইবুনালে; না আন্তর্জাতিক আইন না দেশীয় আইন; কোনটাই প্রযোজ্য নয়। ফলে এই ট্রাইবুনালে সুবিচার পাওয়া যাবে না ; এখানে বিচারের নামে অবিচার হবে।
এছাড়া এই ট্রাইবুনালে যে তিনজনকে বিচারক হিসেবে নিয়োগ করা হয়েছে, তার মধ্যে যিনি ট্রাইবুনালের প্রধান হিসেবে আছেন,অর্থাৎ বিচারপতি নিজামুল হক- তিনি এ বিষয়ে যখন ইনভেস্টিগেট হয় তখন তার সংগে জড়িত ছিলেন। সুতরাং একজন ব্যক্তি যিনি ইনভেস্টিগেটর ছিলেন তিনি জাজ বা বিচারক হতে পারেন না। আর এ বিষয়টি আন্তর্জাতিকভাবে স্বীকৃত। সমাজতান্ত্রিক দেশগুলোতেও এই আইন স্বীকৃত । ফলে একজন ইনভেস্টিগেটর যেখানে বিচারক এবং ট্রাইবুনালের প্রধান হিসেবে কাজ করেন সেখানে এই ট্রাইবুনালের কাছে তো কোন বিচার পাওয়া যাবে না।
যদি এখানে বিচার নিশ্চিত করতে হয় তাহলে আন্তর্জাতিক সম্প্রদায়ের সম্পৃক্ততা থাকতে হবে। আমি আগেও এ সম্পর্কে বলেছি যে, ৫ টি মহাদেশ থেকে ১৫ জন বিচারক আনা হোক, ট্রাইবুনালের আইনকে আন্তর্জাতিক পর্যায়ে উন্নীত করা হোক, আইনকে জনসমক্ষে উন্মুক্ত করা হোক,সরকার পক্ষ ও অভিযুক্ত পক্ষ উভয়ের জন্য বিদেশী আইনজীবী আনার সুযোগ দেয়া হোক। যদি এসব করা হয় তাহলে বিচার হতে পারে । তা নাহলে এখানে বিচার হবে না। সুবিচার পাবে না অভিযুক্তরা।

রেডিও তেহরান : আচ্ছা ট্রাইবুনালের বিচারপতি নিজামুল হকের প্রতি মাওলানা সাঈদী যে অনাস্থা জ্ঞাপন করেছেন, তা দুই বারই আদালতে খারিজ হয়ে গেছে। আসলে আইনে কি আছে? একজন যদি কোন বিচারকের উপর অনাস্থার কথা বলে, তাহলে বাংলাদেশের আইন অনুযায়ী সে ক্ষেত্রে বিচার বিভাগ বা সরকার কি পদক্ষেপ নিতে পারে ।

ব্যারিস্টার আব্দুর রাজ্জাক : দেখুন, এটি খুবই দু:খজনক বিষয়। বাংলাদেশের বিচার বিভাগ কিন্তু নতুন সৃষ্টি হয়নি। এখানে ১৮৬২ সালে হাইকোর্ট ও সুপ্রীমকোর্ট হয়েছে। এটি দীর্ঘদিনের ইতিহাস। আর তখন থেকেই একটি নিয়ম চলে আসছে যে, কোন একজন বিচারপতিকে বিশেষ করে হাইকোর্টের বিচারপতিকে নিয়ে যদি কেউ প্রশ্ন তোলে যে আপনি একজন আইনজীবী হিসেবে ছিলেন এই বিচার কার্যে বা কোন কারণে অনাস্থা আনা হয় তাহলে সাথে সাথে তিনি বা সেই বিচারপতি বিচার কাজ থেকে নিজেকে উইদড্রো করে নেন। মামলাটি সাথে সাথে অন্য বিচারকের কাছে পাঠিয়ে দেন। ট্রাইবুনালের বিচারপতি নিজামুল হক নাসিম; তিনিও হাইকোর্টের একজন বিচারপতি, তিনিও বিষয়টি জানেন। এটি কিন্তু একটি অত্যন্ত সাধারণ বিষয় যা আমাদের আদালত প্রাঙ্গণে হয়ে থাকে। আমাদের হাইকোর্ট সুপ্রীম কোর্টের বারান্দায় যারা ঘোরাফেরা করে তারাও এ বিষয়টি জানে। তারপরও একজন অভিযুক্ত যখন নিজামুল হকের বিরুদ্ধে অনাস্থা আনলেন তারপরও তিনি সেখানেই আছেন। তবে এটি প্রতিষ্ঠিত সত্য যে তার ব্যাপারে প্রশ্ন তোলা বা অনাস্থাজ্ঞাপনের পর তিনি আর এই বিচারকাজ পরিচালনা করতে পারেন না। হি ইজ সিমপলি ডিসকোয়ালিফাইড।

রেডিও তেহরান : এসব কিছুর পর এই ট্রাইবুনাল যদি মাওলানা সাঈদীকে শাস্তি দেয় তাহলে আইনের দৃষ্টিতে তা কতখানী গ্রহণযোগ্য হবে?

ব্যারিস্টার আব্দুর রাজ্জাক : দেখুন আপনি যে প্রশ্নটি করলেন, যে মাওলানা সাঈদীর অনাস্থা সম্পর্কিত আবেদন বা বিচারপতির বৈধতা নিয়ে করা আবেদন খারিজ করার পরও যদি এই ট্রাইবুনাল মাওলানা দেলোয়ার হোসেন সাঈদীকে শাস্তি দেয় তাহলে তা আইনের দৃষ্টিতে কি হবে ? এ প্রসঙ্গে আমি বলব সেই রায় মোটেও গ্রহণযোগ্য হবে না । দেশীয় আইনেও গ্রহণ যোগ্য হবে না, আন্তর্জাতিক আইনেও গ্রহণযোগ্য হবে না।

রেডিও তেহরান: আচ্ছা বর্তমানে যুদ্ধাপরাধ ট্রাইবুনাল থেকে যে রায় হবে তার বিরুদ্ধে কি উচ্চ আদালতে আপিল করার সুযোগ আছে কি না ?

ব্যারিস্টার আব্দুর রাজ্জাক : আপনি খুবই গুরুত্বপূর্ণ বিষয় এখানে প্রশ্ন করেছেন। সাধারণত আদালতের কোন একটি রায়ের পর উচ্চ আদালতে আপিলের সুযোগ থাকে। কিন্তু যুদ্ধাপরাধ ট্রাইবুনাল থেকে রায়ের পর তার বিরুদ্ধে উচ্চ আদালতে আপিল করার কোনো সুযোগ আমাদের নেই। আর এ সুযোগ না থাকার কারণে এই আইনটিকে কালো আইন হিসেবে অভিহিত করছি ।
দেখুন কোন বিচারের ক্ষেত্রে যেটি হয়ে থাকে-সেটি হচ্ছে সব বিচার কাজ যখন শেষ হয়ে যায় যখন শাস্তি ঘোষণা করা হয় তখন ফাইনালি একবার সুপ্রীমকোর্টে যাওয়ার সুযোগ থাকে। কিন্তু এখানে সে সুযোগ নেই। ফলে এটি একটি কালো আইন।

রেডিও তেহরান : আচ্ছা গোটা যুদ্ধাপরাধের বিচার প্রক্রিয়া এবং ট্রাইবুনালের কার্যক্রমকে আপনি কিভাবে দেখছেন ?

ব্যারিস্টার আব্দুর রাজ্জাক :গোটা যুদ্ধাপরাধের বিচার প্রক্রিয়া এবং ট্রাইবুনালের কার্যক্রম নিয়ে আমি বলব, এখানে আমরা বিচার পাব না, সুবিচার পেতে পারি না। তবে আমরা একটা জিনিষিই চাই যে সুবিচার হোক, সুবিচার হোক এবং সুবিচার হোক।

রেডিও তেহরান : বিএনপির সংসদ সদস্য সালাহউদ্দীন কাদের চৌধুরী বলেছেন, সংবিধান লংঘন করে এই ট্রাইবুনাল গঠন করা হয়েছে। এছাড়া এই ট্রাইবুনাল নিজেও আইন মানছে না। আপনি একজন বিশিষ্ট আইনজীবী হিসেবে সালাহ উদ্দীন কাদের চৌধুরীর এই বক্তব্যকে কিভাবে দেখছেন?

ব্যারিস্টার আব্দুর রাজ্জাক : সালাহউদ্দীন কাদের চৌধুরী যে কথা বলেছেন সেটি একটি বিষয়। আমাদের কথা হচ্ছে সংবিধান অনুযায়ী এই বিচার হচ্ছে না ।মানুষের মৌলিক অধিকার হরণের ক্ষমতা কারো নেই।দেশের যে কোন ব্যক্তিকে যদি বিচারের কাঠগড়ায় নেয়া হয় এবং তার যদি সেখানে মৌলিক অধিকার ক্ষুন্ন হয় তাহলে সে হাইকোর্টে বা সুপ্রীম কোর্টে যেতে পারে । কিন্তু এই ট্রাইবুনালে সেরকম কোনো সুবিধা কারো নেই।

Protest of Barrister Abdur Razzaq against the news titled “Barrister Razzaq is also being Investigated for War Crimes” published in Amader Shomoi

Barrister Abdur Razzaq, Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh and also the Assistant Secretary General of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami has formally protested against the news item published on 11th December 2011 in the Daily Amader Shomoy, a Bangla language daily newspaper published from Dhaka under the title “Barrister Abdur Razzaq is also being Investigated for War Crimes ”.

In his protest, Mr Razzaq stated that a certain quarter has been active in a smear campaign against him with the view to harassing and humiliating him. This campaign started soon after he took over the onerous task of defending five top leaders of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami who are accused of war crimes before the International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka. In his note of protest, Barrister Razzaq asserted that it is his fundamental right guaranteed by and under the Constitution of Bangladesh, to perform his professional duties by defending people accused of committing crimes. However, a powerful section within the administration is active in preventing him from discharging his professional responsibilities. Despite all odds, Barrister Razzaq expressed his determination to perform his professional duties without any fear.

The news item referring to International Crimes Tribunal sources, reported that the Investigation Agency is conducting an investigation against Barrister Abdur Razzaq, who is the chief defence counsel for the leaders of Jamaat who are facing war crimes charges. It may be mentioned that in the past attempts have been made to implicate Barrister Razzaq in various criminal proceedings including a criminal proceeding arising out of an incident that took place in Dhaka in September while he was in Europe.

Mir Ahmad BinQuasem

Barrister-at-Law

Associate of Barrister Abdur Razzaq

http://www.martindale.com/Mir-Ahmad-BinQuasem/41459598-lawyer.htm

Protest Note Barrister Razzaq Investigation War Crimes.pdf

Washington expresses 'grave concern' over war crime trial

GEOPOLITICS UNDER TRANSFORMATION

by M. Shahidul Islam, Friday January 21;Weekly Holiday

Within years of being catapulted as a pre-eminent regional power, India is on the verge of losing its wind-fallen clout due to some new variables having intervened to re-structure the South Asian geopolitical landscape.
Consequently, the AL-led coalition govt. is under intense pressure to change courses in domestic and international policy pursuance.
The prime mover of this geopolitical shift is the US President Barack Obama, who seems to have re-set his focus on working with China more closely, seemingly at the cost of India, in a desperate bid to retrieve the US's and the global economy from a grinding stagnation that has begun to spark Tunisia-type upheavals in many countries.
The increased Washington-Beijing intimacy has also been necessitated by factors such as dealing with North Korea and Iran, the two nations inexorably moving toward military-nuclearization and, over which Beijing wields enormous influence.
Besides, Beijing's recent decision to trade with Russia using their respective currencies-which further reduced demand on US dollar - has become a major concern in Washington.

The Gurdian on Bangladesh Human Rights Violation on Member of Parliament

S. Q. Chowdhury Kisses his granddaughter while he was being taken back into Jail again from court.

UK faces legal challenge from family of Bangladeshi allegedly tortured by 'death squad'

Lawyers acting for the family of MP Salauddin Chowdhury claim the British government was complicit in his alleged torture


* Matthew Taylor
* guardian.co.uk, Friday 31 December 2010 19.24 GMT
* Article history

Members of the Rapid Action Battalion Members of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) received British training in 'investigative interviewing techniques'. Photograph: Abir Abdullah/EPA

The British government faces a legal challenge over allegations it was complicit in the torture of Bangladeshi MP Salauddin Chowdhury, who was arrested by the country's security forces earlier this month.

Lawyers acting for the 63-year-old's family claim the training provided by British forces to Bangladesh's Rapid Action Battalion [RAB], which arrested Chowdury, places the UK in breach of its obligations under international law.

RAB members have been held responsible for hundreds of extrajudicial killings since the unit was established in 2004. The unit itself admits to being responsible for more than 600 deaths, which it euphemistically attributes to "crossfire".

Details of British support for RAB were revealed in US embassy cables released by WikiLeaks and reported by the Guardian. They show that Britain has been providing training in "investigative interviewing techniques" and "rules of engagement".

According to Amnesty International, Chowdury was detained and tortured by RAB officers and Bangladeshi intelligence officials at an apartment in the Banani district of Dhaka on 16 December. His captors are alleged to have brought with them a number of torture implements and a doctor, who is alleged to have revived him three times after he lost consciousnes. The mistreatment is said to have included applying electrodes to his genitals, beating him, slitting his stomach with razors and twisting his toenails and fingernails with pliers.

According to Amnesty, Chowdury was initially arrested for questioning over an arson attack in which a person died, and was then reported to have been charged with offences allegedly committed during Bangladesh's 1971 war of independence. He is now being held in prison in Bangladesh.

Today his son, Fayyaz Chowdury, called on the British government to intervene.

"The UK government is up to its neck in this case having provided practical and financial support to RAB who are responsible for my father's ill-treatment. I am a British national and they must now intervene to secure my father's immediate release from prison and a binding undertaking from the Bangladesh government that he will not be subjected to any further torture and ill-treatment or a patently unfair trial."

The Foreign Office has defended the training offered to RAB as "fully in line with our laws and our values". A spokesman sought to suggest it was providing only "human rights training" for RAB, although RAB's head of training told the Guardian he was unaware of any human rights training since he was appointed last June.

Phil Shiner, of Public Interest Lawyers, which is bringing the legal challenge on behalf of Fayyaz Chowdury said: "The UK government owe the clearest of international obligations to my client, a British citizen, in circumstances where they are complicit in the torture of people like Mr Salauddin Chowdury. These obligations reflect international law principles that prohibit states from aiding and assisting other states in international crimes such as torture and extrajudicial executions. The UK government must use all means at their disposal to secure the immediate release of my client's father and to ensure that he cannot face a kangaroo court for war crimes that he did not commit."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/31/bangladesh-britain-legal-challenge-torture?INTCMP=SRCH

Senator John Boozman Strongly Criticizes War Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh

MP tortured by security forces in Bangladesh

22 December 2010

Amnesty International is calling on the Bangladeshi government to immediately investigate allegations that a MP for the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party has been tortured while in police custody.

Bangladeshi security forces have tortured Salauddin Quader Chowdhury during interrogations, Amnesty International has learned. This has included applying electrodes to his genitals, beating him, slitting his stomach with razors and twisting his toenails and fingernails with pliers. There are fears that he may face further torture or other ill-treatment.

“The Bangladeshi government must ensure that Salauddin Quader Chowdhury is protected and treated properly and that these very serious allegations of torture are investigated,” said Abbas Faiz, Amnesty International’s Bangladesh researcher.

“In particular, the authorities must ensure that he has access to the necessary specialist medical attention, including by independent doctors.”

Chowdhury was arrested on 16 December in connection with a case in which a private car was set alight in Dhaka on 26 June, killing a passenger. On 19 December, the International Crimes Tribunal, a Bangladeshi court, issued an arrest warrant against him for alleged crimes against humanity during the 1971 Liberation War.

According to reports received by Amnesty International, a combined force of Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), Detective Branch (DB) police, and the Directorate-General Foreign Intelligence (DGFI) arrested Chowdhury in the early hours of 16 December at an apartment in the Banani neighbourhood in Dhaka.

Family members who were allowed to see him earlier today, told Amnesty International that Chowdhury reported that security forces came prepared with torture equipment as well as with a physician, and proceeded to torture him for several hours.

He told his family that he lost consciousness three times during the ordeal, and the doctor present revived him. However, when his condition deteriorated under interrogation, he was taken to the Bangabandhu Medical Hospital for treatment.

Video footage from the hospital grounds show Chowdhury weak, in pain, unable to walk on his own and with an apparent blood stain on his shirt.

After an hour in the hospital, Chowdhury was reportedly taken to headquarters of the Detective Branch of the Police (DBHQ), where he was subjected to further torture, including with electric shocks.

Family members who saw Chowdhury earlier today told Amnesty International that his genitals and nose were still bleeding, there were cut marks on his stomach and bruises all over his body. They said that he was very frightened for his life.

The police have said that he was taken to hospital to be treated for an asthma condition. The Inspector General of Police has denied that Salauddin Quader Chowdhury has been tortured.

Torture is widespread in Bangladesh, particularly during police interrogations.

“Given the detailed information provided by the family and the media, the possibility that Salauddin Quader Chowdhury was tortured must be taken seriously and the possibility that he may face further torture or other ill-treatment cannot be ruled out,” said Abbas Faiz.

Today the Court has ordered him to be placed in Dhaka Central Prison pending proceedings in his trial. According to Salauddin Quader Chowdhury’s family, he has not been allowed to meet his lawyers since his arrest, and was not present at the Court during today’s hearing. Instead, he was kept in the holding cell downstairs, where six members of his family were allowed to see him, under Court orders.

Chowdhury is 63 years old. He has suffered three heart attacks and has several cardiac stents.

“Amnesty International is deeply concerned about the allegations, and considers the reported torture of Salauddin Quader Chowdhury, as of any other human being, wholly unacceptable,” said Abbas Faiz.

“The government of Bangladesh is obligated under international human rights law, to protect all persons under its jurisdiction from torture and other ill-treatment at all times.”

Main Article: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/mp-tortured-security-forces-bangladesh-2010-12-22

BNP M. P S. Q. Chowdhury's foot fingers are torne and his ears are bleeding

Detective Branch of Police raids Jamaat HQ

Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Police conducted an hour-long raid on Jamaat-e-Islami head office in the city's Moghbazar last night.

Sources said a joint team of police and Detective Branch (DB) of Ramna launched the raid around 7:00pm in a bid to arrest Rezaul Karim, president of Islami Chhatra Shibir.

The Shibir leader of Jamaat's student wing is accused in a number of cases including one for issuing threats to the government.

Shiblee Noman, officer-in-charge of Ramna Police Station, told The Daily Star that none was arrested and nothing was seized from the party office.

Jamaat protested and condemned the raid.

In a written statement Acting Jamaat Ameer Mokbul Ahmad and Secretary General ATM Azharul Islam alleged that police broke one of the almirahs during the raid and took away copies of the party constitution and several other publications.

The Jamaat leaders also termed the raid harassment of its leaders and activists.

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=163313

Bangladesh: Politics of hate, An ancient vendetta continues to eat away at public life

Nov 18th 2010 | DHAKA

MORE than two years after the army aborted a dismal interregnum and released from jail the leaders of the country’s two rival political dynasties, the politics of hate and attrition grind away in Bangladesh. The thanks go mainly to the personal vendetta of the prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, one of the two leaders, against the other, Khaleda Zia.

On November 13th Mrs Zia was evicted from her home of nearly 30 years in Dhaka’s cantonment area. The move triggered a hartal, a protest strike called by Mrs Zia’s opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). Violence broke out between her supporters and those of Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League (AL). The country’s third political force, the army, has backed the High Court’s eviction order. Shrewdly, Sheikh Hasina has allocated the vast plot surrounding Mrs Zia’s home for housing for the families of 57 military officers killed in a mutiny early last year, soon after the AL swept to power.

The eviction is part of the League’s mission to break the BNP’s back. It is obsessed with airbrushing from history the legacy of the political dynasty founded by Mrs Zia’s late husband, General Ziaur Rahman, hero of Bangladesh’s war of independence against West Pakistan in 1971.

In February the government renamed Dhaka’s Zia International Airport after a respected Sufi saint. It has decided to “reprint” the 1972 constitution to reflect a landmark Supreme Court ruling in July which, among other things, declared null and void the rule of various military governments, including General Zia’s, following the assassination in 1975 of Bangladesh’s founding father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. (Sheikh Mujib, as he is usually known, happens to be the father of Sheikh Hasina.) In October a court issued an arrest warrant for Mrs Zia’s younger son in a money-laundering case. Four corruption cases stand against Mrs Zia, while 13 cases against Sheikh Hasina, filed during the army interregnum, have been withdrawn.

Yet the BNP was in a shambles even before the recent onslaught. The party has just 30 seats in a 300-strong parliament, which it boycotts. It is split: Mrs Zia can count only on the support of a minority of BNP leaders. Meanwhile, the leaders of the BNP’s main ally, Jamaat-e-Islami, Bangladesh’s largest Islamic party, have all been jailed. They stand accused of alleged atrocities during the country’s war of secession, and face possible execution. The alliance has hurt the BNP’s reputation, particularly internationally, says Moudud Ahmed, a former prime minister and Mrs Zia’s lawyer. Yet the BNP needs Jamaat-e-Islami’s electoral support.

Mrs Zia’s only hope is that people will get fed up with rising prices, power shortages and the open encouragement by Sheikh Hasina’s government of the kind of predatory capitalism not seen since, well, Mrs Zia’s rule in 2001-06. The government’s high approval ratings are on the slide. At some point, Mrs Zia appears to calculate, mass adulation will attach to her eldest son and heir apparent, Tarique Rahman, now in British exile. Yet Mr Rahman, who left army custody with a snapped spinal cord in 2008, is the symbol of Mrs Zia’s kleptocratic rule. He is loathed even among the BNP’s leaders.

Meanwhile, Sheikh Hasina’s vendetta has the support of the Indian government, with whom Bangladesh’s relations are much improved. The end to Mrs Zia’s political dynasty has become almost a tenet of national security for India, which sees her family meddling in India’s domestic affairs. This month Mr Rahman’s right-hand man told investigators that the Pakistan embassy in Dhaka and the United Liberation Front of Asom, a militant group fighting for an independent homeland for ethnic Assamese in India’s north-east, paid the BNP (for which, read Mr Rahman) and Bangladeshi spooks some $10m for the secret transshipment to Indian insurgents of ten truckloads of arms.

Western governments also oppose Mr Rahman’s return. They supported the thinly veiled army coup in January 2007, which prevented the BNP from stealing an election. The coup also brought in a crackdown on fringe groupings of Islamic extremists courted by the former BNP government. Continuing the crackdown is a centrepiece of AL policy.

Despite the government’s sliding ratings, popular support for Sheikh Hasina’s clan dwarfs that for Mrs Zia’s. And with such a tailwind, it is extraordinary how the League remains stuck in a divisive politics based on personal grievances that go back nearly four decades. Time, you might think, to get on with governing.

main news: http://www.economist.com/node/17525830?story_id=17525830

'I was forced out'

haka, Nov 13 (bdnews24.com) — BNP chief Khaleda Zia broke down once again as she described how she had been, allegedly, dragged out of her cantonment house associated with most "intimate memories" of her life.

"They've uprooted me from my age-old memories," said Khaleda, referring to the eviction from her residence of 38 years from where she saw her husband, the military strongman Ziaur Rahman's rise and fall.

She claimed that the defence personnel had insulted her when she was being driven out of her house.

In a press conference at her political office on Saturday evening, the two-time prime minister claimed she was not given enough time to pack her bel;ongings.

BNP secretary general Khandaker Delwar Hossain, before her speech, had alleged that she was dragged out of the house, although the army said Khaleda Zia was leaving the house of her own volition.

"I have been living in that house for the last 40 years; a lot of memories of good and bad times are attached to that house."

"After president Zia gave his life for this country, the memories around that house became more vivid to me."

"Today, they have evicted me from that place full of nostalgia."

Terming the eviction as an atrocious act, the opposition leader said that she felt insulted and horrified by this "inhuman behaviour".

"They even did not hesitate to hit my family members."

If this is the way they treat the main opposition leader, you can well imagine what the situation of the common people is, she said.

The BNP chief claimed that law enforcers rammed the main entrance of her house.

"They have dragged me out after smashing my bedroom door."

Bursting into tears, Khaleda said law enforcers shoved her into the car.

"They [the government] are claiming that I left the house voluntary, which is nothing but a total lie."

bdnews24.com/sm/mi/pks/rhn/am/2100h

Name of Honorable Guests in the International Seminar on Human Rights Situation in Bangladesh

Mr Justice Mustafa Kamal, Former Chief Justice of Bangladesh from June first 1999 to December 31 1999,



Mr Justice Latifur Rahman, former chief justice of Bangladesh( 1st of January 2000 to 28th of February 2001) and former chief adviser of the caretaker government of the people’s republic of Bangladesh ( 15th July 2001 to 10th October, 2001)



-Mr Justice Mahmudul Amin Choudhury, former Chief Justice of Bangladesh (1st of March, 2001 to 17th of May 2002)



-Mr Justice K. M. Hasan, former chief justice of Bangladesh ( 23rd of May 2003 t0 26th of March 2004))



-Mr Justice T H Khan, Senior Advocate, supreme court of Bangladesh and Honorable Judge of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.



-Mr Rafiq-ul- Haq, Barrister- at- law and Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court and former Attorney General of Bangladesh



-Mr Ajmalul Hossain QC Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh



-Mr Fida M Kamal, Barrister-at-Law, Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court, and former Attorney General of Bangladesh(5th February2007 to 18th July 2008)



we are honored to have member of the delegation of the United Kingdom Mr Steven Kay QC of 9 Bedford Row, he is the founding member of the International Criminal Law Bureau, a leading practitioner of International Criminal law and who also appeared before the International Criminal Tribunals for Yogoslavia and for the International Criminal Tribunals for RWANDA, and Mr Toby Cadman, Barrister at law and an international criminal law specialist who headed the prosecution section for war crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina.



honorable president of the Supreme Court Bar Association Senior Advocate Khondkar Mahbub Hossen shall chair today’s seminar.

Steven Kay QC speech at sonargoan hotel seminar human rights bangladesh

part 1



part 2

Steven Kay QC speech at sonargoan hotel seminar human rights bangladesh part 3-4

Islamist oppositions are treated in this fashion

Part 3



Part 4


Islamist opposition are treated in this fashion

Steven Kay QC speech at sonargoan hotel seminar- human rights bangladesh

Part 5


Part 6

Toby Cadman Speech at Sonargoan hotel Seminar on Human rights in Bangladesh

Amnesty International on ARBITRARY ARRESTS of Opposition in Bangladesh

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

PUBLIC STATEMENT


23 February 2010

For immediate release

AI Index: ASA 13/005/2010



BANGLADESH: POLITICALLY MOTIVATED ARBITRARY ARRESTS HAMPER IMPARTIAL INVESTIGATION OF CAMPUS VIOLENCE



The government of Bangladesh must refrain from arbitrary mass arrests, which appear to have been directed only at the opposition student activists. Criminal investigations must be impartial, regardless of the suspect’s political affiliation or party membership. Moreover, the authorities must ensure that the detainees are brought promptly before a court and allowed to challenge the legality of their detention, that they are not at risk of torture or other ill-treatment, and that they have access to their lawyers, families, and proper medical care.


Last week more than 300 supporters of Islami Chhatra Shibir, the student wing of the opposition party Jamaat-e-Islami, were arrested in Dhaka, Rajshahi, Chittagong and other cities. The majority of them were picked up from dormitories or rented accommodation in and around university campuses. It is not known if any of them have been charged with a recognizable criminal offence.


The arrests followed a wave of violence at major university campuses in Bangladesh, where rival student activists of the ruling Awami League party and opposition parties have fought each other over control of university halls of residence. At least four students, one from Dhaka, two from Rajshahi, and one from Chittagong universities have been killed in the midst of these clashes since early February.


The death of the first student on 2 February at Dhaka University was due to violent clashes between two rival factions of the Bangladesh Chhatra League, the student wing of the Awami League. No members of this group appear to have been investigated for his death. The government’s apparent reluctance to investigate in this case further highlights the political motivations underlying its response to the violence at the universities.


Bangladesh Chhatra League members have also been involved in clashes with the Islami Chhatra Shibir at Rajshahi, Chittagong and other university campuses. While members of the Islami Chhatra Shibir have been the main targets of the mass arrests, Bangladesh Chhatra League activists have continued to clash and attack opposition supporters, with no accountability.


Amnesty International acknowledges the responsibility of government authorities to prevent violence at the university campuses and bring those responsible for the killings to justice. However, the one-sided manner in which the police have carried out the arrests so far indicates that criminal investigations into the violence are unlikely to be impartial or fair.


Raids on student residences have been carried out at random and any Islami Chhatra Shibir supporters found there have been detained. People have reportedly been arrested arbitrarily as police have made no efforts at the time of arrest to separate ordinary student members of the Islami Chhatra Shibir from those suspected of involvement in the attacks.


The majority of the detainees are being held in jails. More than 70 of them are detained at the Dhaka Central Jail; up to 100 at the Rajshahi Central Jail; and up to 70 at the Chittagong Central Jail. More students have been picked up from other cities. According to reports, lawyers were not allowed to meet them, so they have effectively been deprived of the right to appoint legal counsel and apply for release on bail.


Between 30 and 35 of the Islami Chhatra Shibir detainees are reportedly in police custody under interrogation. Torture in police custody is widespread in Bangladesh. Detainees in police custody have no access to lawyers or family visits during the period of their remand even though there are legal provisions for such access.


The government’s politically motivated response to the violence has allowed attacks by members of the ruling party’s student wing to continue, including against news reporters covering these attacks. Bangladesh Chhatra League activists attacked and injured 11 journalists working for different Bangladeshi dailies who were covering Bangladesh Chhatra League’s incidences of beating of other students on the Rajshahi university campus on 11 February.


Background


Violence at university campuses is a frequent occurrence in Bangladesh. Groups involved in the violence are student wings of the main political parties. These student groups are mainly Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL, affiliated to the Awami League, which has the majority of seats in Parliament but rules in coalition with 13 much smaller parties); Islami Chhatra Shibir, (Shibir, affiliated to Jamaat-e-Islami, currently in opposition), and Bangladesh Chhatra Dhal (BCD, affiliated to the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, currently in opposition). These groups have in the past reportedly kept arms and have used violence leading to deaths and injury of people. Political parties have pledged, but failed, to disarm them. None of the political parties has condemned the violence carried out by their own members, while often only blaming their opponents for the violence.

main article: http://goo.gl/AblRe

Amnesty International on Mirza Abbas's home torture

Bangladeshi security forces used excessive force during raid
Victims of the raid described sustained and unprovoked beatings

Victims of the raid described sustained and unprovoked beatings

© Amnesty International

Amnesty International has photographed male and female victims' injuries

Amnesty International has photographed male and female victims' injuries

© Amnesty International

30 June 2010

Bangladeshi security forces used excessive force during a raid on the house of a senior opposition politician on 27 June, Amnesty International said on Thursday.

The Bangladesh Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) carried out a violent attack on those gathered peacefully inside the house of Mirza Abbas, a leading Bangladesh National Party (BNP) politician and former mayor of Dhaka, according to testimony given to Amnesty International.

Victims of the raid described sustained and unprovoked beatings of activists and Mirza Abbas' family members, denial of medical treatment after arrests, and the eliciting of signatures on blank forms as a condition of release, which Amnesty International suspects are for the purpose of falsifying confessions.

Amnesty International has photographed injuries to male and female victims of the beatings.

More than twenty people were injured during the raid, including Mirza Abbas’ wife Afroza Abbas and his 85 year old mother.

BNP supporters had gathered at Mirza Abbas’s house after he been arrested and accused of involvement in violence during a general strike called by the party.

"The government should immediately investigate the circumstances surrounding this violent raid and ensure that any people hurt by security officials receive justice and appropriate compensation,” said Abbas Faiz, Amnesty International’s Bangladesh researcher, from Dhaka.

Amnesty International is calling on the authorities to order security forces to comply with their obligations to exercise restraint and avoid the use of excessive force as the country faces a series of clashes during protests.

At least 80 people have been injured over the past two days as police clashed with striking textile workers and protesters contesting the arrest of three top leaders of the opposition Jamaat-e-Islami party.

The main opposition party, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), called for a national strike on 27 June. The strike, which was generally orderly, sparked off clashes between the police and demonstrators in some parts of the country, including in Dhaka.

Hundreds of people have been arrested on allegations of involvement in violence, including Mirza Abbas.

“There has been no evidence that the people in Mirza Abbas’ house were violating any law or in any way threatening anyone, so the violent actions of RAB seem totally unjustified,” said Abbas Faiz. “Given RAB’s history of using of excessive, even lethal, force, this incident demands an immediate and strong reaction from the authorities.”

The RAB claims that the security forces entered the ground floor office of Mirza Abbas after people had thrown pieces of bricks at them from that direction.

However, video footage taken by journalists and viewed by Amnesty International shows no sign of people attacking RAB officers in or around the house, but rather, shows RAB personnel attacking people inside the house.

One woman told Amnesty International that she was in the courtyard fetching water when RAB personnel stormed in and grabbed her: "They beat me on my back, the back of my thighs, my arms and my shoulders with a baton. I fell on the ground but the RAB people continued beating me."

She said four or five men beat her until she lost consciousness, and that she did not go to hospital out of fear of arrest there.

Another woman said she was handcuffed in front of the house, then was tied up with a rope and dragged into the courtyard where she was beaten.

She was detained for eight hours by police, denied medical treatment, and only released on condition that her husband sign a blank piece of paper that they feared would be used to manufacture false evidence.

A woman who ran to the bathroom to hide from the security forces told Amnesty International that the RAB chased her, forced the bathroom door open, dragged her out and began to beat her. "I kept asking why they were beating me, but they did not stop and did not answer."

A RAB official who spoke to Amnesty International said "perhaps there should have been more restraint; if there have been excesses, these would be investigated."

However, the government has so far ignored calls from BNP politicians and at least one MP of the governing Awami League to address RAB excesses in the raid.

"The government of Bangladesh must stop praising security forces for carrying out human rights violations, and instead make them accountable to the rule of law," said Abbas Faiz.

Amnesty International also called for investigations into any criminal attacks carried out by demonstrators during the general strike to be carried out through the criminal justice system, not punished by security forces outside of the due process of law.
main article: http://goo.gl/eGpXL