& 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

Most Razakar, Al-Badr men were from Jamaat

Muntassir Mamoon tells war crimes tribunal

Staff Correspondent
Most members of the Shanti Committee, the Razakars, Al-Badr and Al-Shams were from the Jamaat-e-Islami, said eminent historian Prof Muntassir Mamoon at International Crimes Tribunal-1 yesterday.
Prosecution witness Muntassir said this during cross-examination in the war crimes case against former Jamaat chief Ghulam Azam, when a defence counsel suggested that the Razakar and
Al-Badr were not separate forces.
“It's new information because, according to my knowledge, though Razakar, Shanti Committee, Al-Badr and Al-Shams were counted separately, the lion's share of the members of these forces were Jamaat men,” said Muntassir.
Defence counsel Mizanul Islam suggested that Muntassir had no idea about the total number of members of the Shanti Committee, Razakar, Al-Badr and Al-Shams men and therefore his
SEE PAGE 19 COL 5 FROM PAGE 20 statement regarding the presence of Jamaat members in those forces was untrue.
“It's not true,” Muntassir said, adding, “Jamaat leaders never disclose the number of their party members.”
Mizanul objected and pleaded before the tribunal to append its objection to the parenthesis.
The prosecution objected to that.
However, Muntassir then said had the party published the names of its members, it would be clear as to how many members of the Jamaat worked for the forces. And that his claim was right since the Jamaat never revealed its members' count.
The tribunal did not record the witness's explanation but noted the defence objection.
Mizanul then asked the witness whether he could mention the political identity of the members of these auxiliary forces of the Pakistani army.
Muntassir said he had never specified anyone other than the people whose names had been published in newspapers and where they had been labelled as such.
Mizanul then made a suggestion that the statement Muntassir gave against Ghulam Azam was made up and untrue.
“With your political point of view, you have taken a position against the Jamaat and are carrying out a false campaign against the party's leaders,” suggested the defence counsel.
The witness denied it and said, “You jMizanul] have to tell me which political ideal I nurture.”
Mizanul refused to answer.
The tribunal recorded Muntassir's reply as “it is not possible for me to reply to the suggestion made without
detecting my political belief. However, the defence suggestion is not true”.
Mizanul then suggested that accused Ghulam Azam's role during the Liberation War of 1971 was only political.
“If mass killing, looting and rape, etc., are part of political principle, then your statement is right,” Muntassir replied.
“Ghulam Azam was not involved in killing, looting during the Liberation War; you have given untrue statement against him,” said the defence counsel.
It was not true, Muntassir said.
In reply to a question, Muntassir said he interviewed Gen Rao Farman Ali, Gen Niazi and other policymakers of Pakistan and asked questions about the killings of intellectuals.
In response to another question, the witness said Gen Niazi might have mentioned in his book that the Razakars were controlled and directed by the Pakistani army. Nonetheless, political parties and their leaders assisted them during the LiberationWar.
Pointing to a section of the interview, Mizanul then told the historian that Gen Niazi had said they did not trust political parties and their leaders and in the case of policymaking, the army alone made the decisions.
“Niazi is a well-known joker. What he had said was not valued even in Pakistan. Whatever be his speech, it was later analysed with other information ...,” replied Muntassir.
Muntassir testified in the case as the first prosecution witness on July 1.
As the defence had failed to complete cross-examination even after 14 hours, the tribunal on July 5 allowed the
defence a session to finish off but said the date would be according to the wish of the witness.
On Monday, the prosecution informed the tribunal that Muntassir would appear before the tribunal yesterday. The defence cross-examined him for two and a half hours yesterday.
Ghulam Azam, facing five charges based on 60 acts of crimes against humanity during the Liberation War, was brought to the tribunal but was not produced before the court.
The proceedings of the case were adjourned until today.
NIZAMI'STRIAL
Defence counsel yesterday cross-examined Bangladesh Islami Oikya Jote Chairman Misbahur Rahman Chowdhury for about two and a half hours in the war crimes case against Jamaat chief Motiur Rahman Nizami.
In response to a question of the defence, prosecution witness Misbahur said after liberation and before he left for London, he went through several newspapers where Nizami was mentioned as the chief of the Al-Badr force.
The defence could not complete cross-examining him yesterday. The court fixed September 30 for completing the cross-examination.
Nizami, who is facing 16 charges of crimes against humanity committed during the Liberation War, was produced before the tribunal yesterday.
MOJAHEED'STRIAL
International Crimes Tribunal-2 yesterday continued recording the cross-examination of second prosecution witness Zahir Uddin Jalal in the war crimes case against Jamaat leader Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed.
The three-member tribunal headed by its Chairman Justice ATM Fazle Kabir recorded the cross-examination before adjourning the case proceedings until tomorrow when Jalal will face further cross-examination.
During his testimony, freedom fighter Jalal had said Jamaat leaders Motiur Rahman Nizami and Mojaheed tortured martyred freedom fighter Rumi, musician Altaf Mahmud and himself at a camp of the Pakistani army in Nakhalpara of Dhaka during the LiberationWar.
Jalal, also known as Bichchhu Jalal, gave his testimony on September 20.
Mojaheed's counsel Syed Mizanur Rahman cross-examined the witness for three and a half hours and asked him over 100 questions.
Mojaheed is facing seven charges of crimes against humanity, including murder, genocide and hatching a conspiracy to kill intellectuals during the war.
KAMARUZZAMAN'STRIAL Ti’ibunaI-2 also completed the cross-examination of Abul Kashem, the ninth prosecution witness in the war crimes case against Jamaat leader Muhammad Kamaruzzaman.
The tribunal adjourned the case proceedings until tomorrow when the 10th prosecution witness is expected to testify.
Narrating his torture at the Al-Badr camp in Mymensingh during the Liberation War, Kashem, a freedom fighter, testified that Al-Badr leaders Kamaruzzaman and Ashraf had controlled Mymensingh during the war.
Kamaruzzaman is facing seven charges of crimes against humanity.