& 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

'Delhi pact doesn't preclude Azam from facing trial'

AL abandoned trial of war criminals: Rafique

By Staff Correspondent
The general debate on Golam Azam's stay In Bangladesh and Issues relating to the people's court continued (or the third day In the Jatlya Sangsad (Parliament) yesterday
The two-hour and twenty minute discussion concentrated more on the legal aspects of the Issue while the Treasury benchers argued In favour of a legal settlement and the Opposition voiced political aspects
From the MPs. Barrister Jamlruddln Sircar. Barrister Raflqul Islam Mia. Sudhangsu Sekhar Halder and Suranjlt Sen Gupta participated in the discussion.
The Speaker. Shaikh Razzaque All. raised many questions for satisfaction of all concerned and for convenience In formulating a decision expected today.
Works Minister Barrister Raflqul Islam Mia who Initiated the deliberations on Golam Azam's stay In Bangladesh and peoples court' at 08.05 last night maintained that as a freedom fighter he wanted to try Golam Azam for his anti people role during the coun try's War of Independence In 1971.
Barrister Rafique. however, argues that It was not possible to try Golam Azam as a war criminal under the International Crime Act 1973 unless It could be proved that he (Golam Azam), along with the Razakcrs. was an auxiliary force placed under the Pakistan armed forces In dulged tn conducting genocide during the Liberation War of the country In 1971
Rafique said that an investigating cell was formed and a prosecutor was appolrltcd by the state in 1973 under the International Crime Act to identify the war criminals.
The Investigating cell iden titled 195 military personnel who committed war crime but they were sent back to Pakistan under the tripartite Delhi Agreement’ signed by the Foreign Ministers of Bangladesh. India and l*aklslan on April 9. 1974
Raflqe went on to say that the investigating cell was abol Ished and appointment of the prosecutor was cancelled after the 195 prisoners of war fccrc allowed to return home which meant that the then govern ment of Bangladesh did not have any Intention to Identify any people as war criminal
The demand of trying of Golam Azam as a war criminal was therefore. Raflqe asserted, did not justify the spirit of the abolition of the Investigating cell by the AL government tn 1974
'But even then as a freedom fighter I am in favour of trying Golam Azam for the crime he committed against humanity' Raflqe said, adding, In that case we have to go by the law of the land that requires adc quate evidences against Golam Azam.'
On the question of people’s court Rafique said, there could be no trial at people's court in any country whereconstltu ttonal court was present
Referring to the peoples tribunal set up by Bertrand Russel tn 1963 Raftqc said that Russel had to go to the Jail for forming the tribunal although he formed the tribunal in Rome and not tn England.
Moreover. RaOqe said, de liberations on the Issue were now subjudke as the Appellate division of the Supreme Court had Issued a Rule Nisi against the government as to why the detention order gtven to Golam Azam would not be considered Illegal.
Advocate Shudhangsu Shekhar Halder of the AL taking the floor argued that Golam Azam was unquestionably a foreigner and thus he had violated the Article 38 of the Constitution by being elected the dhlef of Jamaat-e-lslaml Bangladesh
In favour of his comment the AL MP .said that Bangladesh government Issued him a visa to enter the country on March 11. 1078 as a Pakistani national.
Not only this. Shudhangsu said, 'Golam Azam did not gubmit the certificate expressing his allegiance to the sovereignty to Bangladesh even after he applied for the citizenship of the country"
In favour of this argument, Shudhangsu read out a letter issued by the Home Ministry to Golam Azam on December 3, 1986 which had asked him (Golam Azam) to submit the allegiance certificate
Shudhangsu In a bid to prove that Azam was a non citizen further referred to the text of the detention order of the government before the arrest of Golam Azam on March 24 which read: 'You (Golam Azam) are a registered foreigner'
Then the AL MP proceed to argue that Article 38 of the Constitution did not allow a foreigner to lead a political party of the country.
The Speaker at this stage, in a bid to interpret Article 38 of the Constitution, said that this article ensured the basic-right of the citizens to form associations but did not clearly forbid foreigners to form association. He asked the AL MP to come out with other arguments that did not permit the foreigners to be Involved In local politics
Responding to the speakers call. Shudhangsu Halder referred to the political parties regulations. PPR1978.
The PPR. Shudhangsu said, forbids foreigners to be in-voived In local politics, Foreign aided party was also illegal un dcr the PPR Shudhangsu said adding the PPR was ratified tn Parliament. along with a num ber of martial law ordinances, through the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution in 1979.
In a bld to refute Barrister Rafiqe's argument that Delhi Agreement did not allow Golam Azam to be tried as war criminal. Shudhangsu Halder claimed that the Delhi Agreement did not supersede the law of the country.
Suranjlt Sengupta of Ganafantri Party viewed that the solution to the Golam Azam Issue lay in the political will of the government.
"It s more a political ques tion than a legal one.’ the noted lawyer told the House being asked by the Speaker to deliberate on the legal aspects of the Golam Azam Issue.
Say It specifically whether you want trial of Golam Azam on five charges (he mentioned earlier tn his speech).' Sengupta asked the Treasury benchers. "We all will then extend our allout cooperation.'
Golam Azam must be tried for unleashing genocide, rape and other anti-humanity crimes during Liberation, spreading antt-Bangladesh propaganda after the country's Liberation, illegally staying In the country for the last 14 years. Indulging In national politics and violating the country's constitution by becoming the chief of the Jamaat-c-Islaml party, the senior parliamentarian categorically said.
Referring to widespread public opinion favouring Azam's trial. Sengupta warned the government of the consequences of Ignoring the people.
_ Golam Azam must be tried on this soil for the five crimes. He remarked amidst cheers and thumpings.
Contradicting the Treasury benchers, Sengupta opined that the state should initiate Golam Azam's trial since his offences were against the nation.
Saying that laws are made for the people, Sengupta demanded formation of special tribunal to try Golam Azam and other war offenders.
Regarding to the accusations that the Awaml League government failed to try the collaborators of the occupation Pakistani forces, he asked, what did the next government do on the-trial issue?