& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Accused should be allowed to sing his last song, Defence tells Tribunal

Ershad terms charges false

By Staff Correspondent
Deposed President Ershad. facing trial at the Special Tribunal for illegally possess tng arms said yesterday that his representative had deposited the arms to the Deputy Police Commissioner (North) within the period of the general amnesty declared by the interim government for the surrendering of illegal arms
In his statement under Section 342 in reply to the depositions of Prosecution witnesses Ershad also named five defence witnesses Includ ing former Army chief Lt Gen Atlqur Rahman
Earlier the Prosecution declared the Deputy Police Commissioner (North) Shamsher Alam as gained over by the Defence
Standing tn the dock to re-
ply to the depositions of the Prosecution witnesses General Ershad termed the charges against him as false baseless, concocted, politically motivated and aimed at undermln tng him.
Earlier Judge Mohammed Habibullah read out the depositions before Ershad
General Ershad also produced in the Tribunal a certificate dated April 21. 199). from the Iraqi Ambassador tn Dhaka about three pistols (Included as subject matters of the case) which were said to have been given as gifts from Iraq when he visited that country.
Ershad's lawyer Advocate Strajul Haque submitted in the Tribunal a list of five Defence Witnesses (DWs).
The witnesses are: 1) Lt. General (rtd) AUqur Rahman, former Army chief. 2) Islam Noor Mohammad. Administrative Officer of the Iraqi Embassy, 3) Subedar Mohammad Shajahan. PA to the ex-President 4) an officer of the Army Museum (not named) and 5) an arms expert of the Ordnance Factory (not named).
The deposed President in his 12-page written statement to the tribunal tried to Justify his nine-year rule and his taking over of power in 1982.
The learned Judge Mohammad Hablbullah considered the first eight pages of the statement as not relevant to the case and ruled that newsmen covering the Tribunal proceedings should not publish them.
The Judge said, "the first eight pages of the statement contain die description of his activities during his Presidency and. are politically motivated having no bearing in the case."
He added. "I want to keep the case out of politics and above any attempt to meet a political end."
He said, "Fair Judgement is the most difficult task.... one has to keep not only his shoulder high but also his backbone."
The learned Judge Interrupted the accused Ershad twice as he was making his statement lengthy.
The Judge asked Ershad to limit himself to the subject matter of the case.
"I don't think these are pertinent". the Judge said. "You are required to answer to the accusations,' made by the Prosecution and its witnesses.
Defence Counsel Advocate Sirajul Haque at this stage pleaded that under Section 342 the accused should be given the chance of a hearing without being crossed.
"It is the last communication between the accused and Cod-You (Judge) are the representative of God here. Under Section 342 the accused should be allowed to sing his last song."
The Defence Counsel added T have never seen an accused being stopped from making his statement., for the sake of Justice. if the accused wants to say something in connection with the case he should be allowed to do so."
But Judge Mohammad Hablbullah quoted a ruling of the Indian High Court that the accused is required to make statement only related to the case. He however allowed Ershad to continue his statement.
At this stage the Attorney General also said that the statement should be pertinent to the case and that he would also like to listen.
On the charges against him. Ershad said he had received as gifts three pistols from Iraq, one from Yemen and four DBBL gunsfrom dignitaries-who had visited Bangladesh.
The Investigating Officer did not make efforts to find out the sources of these arms, he added.
He claimed that he received all these gifts as the President of Bangladesh and not as the Individual Ershad.
Secondly, he said the President of the country was exempted from the licensing of those arms by a government circular of November 29. 1973.
He said that the word intermediary bore' in the notification issued by the Home Ministry in 1973 was meaningless and unrealistic. He also submitted a copy of the notification to the Tribunal.
Moreover he said that Mustafizur Rahman (his brother-in-law) had deposited the pistols on December 24 to the Deputy Commissioner of Police Dhaka (North), who is also the Senior to the OC of Cantonment Thana.
He said that the arms deposit was made in presence of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and another Magistrate who were the Prosecution witnesses in the case.
Defending himself Ershad further said that the arms were not recovered in accordance with relevant rules. These were seized from those who had prepared the inventory of articles tn the Sena Bhavan.
Last of all he said that the case was contradictory to Article 52(1) of the Constitution which envisages that a President or a Vice-President shall not be answer able in any court for anything done or omitted by him in the exercise or purported exercise of the functions of his office.
The accused Ershad said. This criminal case will re-main as an unfortunate example which can be quashed by a fair trial'.
'1 don’t know what fate awaits me'. Ershad said in an emotion-choked voice.
Ershad is to face at least eight other criminal cases involving abuse of power and sustaining loss in crores of Taka to the state.
In the last part of his statement Ershad said that he was kept in a condemned cell of the jail. In spite of being a former president, he was put into a ceil which was probably constructed for a convicted person awaiting the death sentence. he added.
Ershad alleged that he was being given sub-standard food and said. *1 understand by such repression the government is pushing me to certain death.'
Earlier Judge Mohammad Habibullah rejected an application of the Defence Counsel that demanded the recalling of a rifle the accused had given to the Army Museum.
Some bullets of that rifle art the subject matter of the case.
Rejecting the plea, the learned Judge said he could not recall the rifle from the Army Museum without its specification.
For the first time yesterday Judge Mohammad Habibullah passed an order on the pressmen covering the trial that nothing of the statement made by the accused should be published without his Pudge's) certification.
According to Court proceedings the order was to have been signed by the journalists present there. The Journalists then made a plea to the court that they should be exempted from signing the order.
DUJ President Zahirul Haque who was present there, said on behalf of the Journalists that the order of the Court would be honoured but that the journalists should^ be ^ex-and that the whole thing should be left to the conscience of the press as the press had been struggling for its freedom and the independence of the Judiciary
The Judge accepted the plea made by the Journalists and relieved them of signing the order.
The court was adjourned to resume hearing on April 30