& 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

Seen from the Gallery

By Mahfuz Ullah
It may well be called the proceedings of the proceed Ings Probably, for the first time In Its history the Jatlya Sangsad heard the most lllu mlnatlng. the most enlighten Ing and the most educating discussion on a national Issue yesterday.
The Issue was how to deal with Prof Golam Azam Those who took pari In the discus »ion were all lawyers and It was also quite an Interesting coincidence that both the freasury and the Opposition benches were represented by two lawyers each.
Barrister Raflqul Islam Mia and Barrister Jamtruddln Sircar represented the BNP while law practitioners Sud hangsu Sekhar Halder and SuranJIt Sengupta took part from the Opposition side.
They were asked to Inter pret the different aspects of the Issue for the Speaker Shaikh Razzaoue All. who need the opinion of the legal practl tloners tn order to arrive at a decision on the Issue. Like a Judge of the higher courts the speaker Intervened, asked questions and occasionally niade It difficult for all of the
While the Barristers of the Treasury bench heaped various law books on their desks to support their arguments the lawyers of the Opposition bench depended more on the photocopies of relevant laws and ordinances they got readied for them.
Taking the floor. Raflqul Islam Mia began with a quota tlon from Tagore saying 'Bengalees love to start some thing but fall to complete It. Reciting a quotation usually turns out to be dramatic but Mia failed.
Tracing back the history of laws relating to trial of war criminals and those who acted against the independence of the country he however, sue cessfully could make his point that Golam Azam should be tried according to the law of the land.
He also argued that the Is sue, being sub Judice, should not be discussed In the House
Quoting from Kaul, an authority on parliamentary practices. Mia Justified that these Issues should be avoided on the floor of the House
Sudhangsu Sekhar Halder, taking part In the discussion, gave a detailed account of how Golam Azam came to the country and read out from the correspondences he received from the government.
Before he could make the Political justification from the trial of Golam Azam, the Speaker asked him to e« plain the legal points under which Golam Azam could be tried
Terming Golam Azam a Razakar, Sudangsu Sekhar. quoting from an ordinance said Razakars were part of the auxiliary force. But he avoided the repeated- quarry from the Speaker whether this auxiliary force was put under the control of Pakistan army at that lime.
Halder, resorting to the evasive practices of a lawyer, when tried to elude the speaker on the point it became clear to all those who were witnessing ihe gripping scene that the International Crimes Act of 1973 has a big hole.
Under the Act. a member of the auxiliary force can be tried If It was placed under the control of the army
Halder took a long time to finish his deliberation which Infuriated the Information Minister Barrister Nazmul
Raising a point of order Huda commented that they valuable time of the House was being spent on Irreverent points . But the Speaker took exception to the comment and replied: How do you say that?
Suranjit Sengupta, the lone member from the Ganatantri Party, when given the floor vacillated between the legal points on and the political justifications of the Issue.