& 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

Gen Mustafiz accuses army HQ of acting like a party mouthpiece

STAFF CORRESPONDENT
A former army chief yesterday accused the army headquarters of acting like a 'mouthpiece' of a political party and labelled the detonation of four grenades seized from the spot of the August 21 carnage as a "state sponsored crime."
"The army headquarters being a national institution has issued a statement as a mouthpiece of a political party, " General (retd) Mustafizur Rahman told reporters at his residence reacting to the statement and the discussions of a parliamentary body about his comments in a statement published recently in national dailies.
The former general in his
FROM PAGE 1
statement immediately after the grenade attacks raised question about the source of the grenades used in the attacks on an Awami League rally on Bangabandhu Avenue that killed 21 people and wounded over 200. He also questioned the process of detonating the grenades seized from the spot.
The army headquarters later issued a statement refuting Mustafiz's views on the attack.
"The army headquarters in its statement unnecessarily resorted to relate my views to a political party. Neither I described my identity as a leader of a political party nor as a former chief of staff. I just spoke as a citizen of the country," Mustafiz said.
He said the army headquarters, by imposing a political identity on him, has itself got involved in politics. "By doing this, the army headquarters, which is a organ of the state, has turned into a organ of a political party," observed the former general.
About the detonation of the four grenades, Mustafiz said the evidence of such an incident can not be destroyed before investigation by the police.
"None has the right to pass order to destroy clues before investigation. Destroying evidence at an executive order is considered as wrongdoing," he said adding, even a presidential order to this effect
would not conform to law.
"Only court can ask to destroy evidence if those are proved as prima facie evidence after police investigation," the former army chief said. "After a criminal incident, the evidence belong to court, not the police or army," he added.
The former general said he as a citizen has the right to question why the grenades were detonated hurriedly. "That's why I asked the army chief few questions...."I thought my questions would help him identify the perpetrators of the heinous crime."
The former army chief said he did not make any provocative comment in his article or statement. "As people questioned whether the grenades had come from the cantonment, I just asked the army chief to check it," he claimed.
"But now there is no scope to check this as the grenades were detonated hurriedly,'' said.
On the recent meeting of the parliamentary standing committee on defence ministry that asked the government to initiate action against persons who tried to link army to the August 21 attack, Mustafiz, also a member of Awami League advisory council, said the issue of destroying clues of the attacks could be discussed in the meeting.