& 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

War Crimes Trial

Mollah's plea for retrial rejected

Staff Correspondent
The International Crimes Tribunal-2 yesterday rejected retrial petition of war crimes accused Jamaat-e-Islami leader Abdul Quader Mollah, removing the apparent barrier to continue with the trial proceedings.
The three-member
tribunal led by Justice Obaidul Hassan with members Justice Md Mozibur Rahman Miah and Judge M Shahinur Islam passed the order after a brief hearing on the petition filed on January 3.
The detained Jamaat assistant secretary general is now facing she charges of crimes against humanity committed during the Liberation War in 1971.
The two tribunals trying the war crimes suspects have so far rejected retrial petitions of five Jamaat leaders.
The defence of Mollah yesterday started placing closing arguments and the tribunal adjourned the proceeding until today.
The tribunal would deliver its verdict after summation of arguments of both the prosecution and the defence. The prosecution have already completed their arguments and may reply to the defence's arguments if they feel the need.
As the proceeding started at 10:45am yesterday, the tribunal asked defence counsel Tajul Islam if they would press the retrial petition, as a similar petition had earlier been rejected.
On January 3, the tribunal rejected retrial petition of Jamaat leader Muhammad Kamaruzzaman as it did not find any merit to consider it.
"We want to press the petition [before the tribunal! for, at least, keeping record," replied Tajul and placed his arguments.
After Tajul's brief arguments, Justice Hassan just uttered, "Similar order; [the petition is] rejected."
On December 3, the Tribunal-1 rejected the retrial petitions of former Jamaat ameer Ghulam Azam, incumbent Ameer Motiur Rahman Nizami and Nayeb-e-Ameer Delawar Hossain Sayedee.
The flurry of retrial petitions began after an alleged Skype conversation between former Tribunal-1 chairman Justice Md Nizamul Huq and expatriate legal expert Ahmed Ziauddin was published by a Bangla daily in December last year.
On December 11, Justice Nizamul stepped down citing personal reasons.
After disposal of Mollah's retrial petition, Abdur Razzaq, chief of the defence of detained Jamaat leaders, started placing arguments in the case.
Razzaq in three and quarter hours placed almost similar arguments, which he placed during charge framinghearing of the case.
Placing documents of parliament proceedings on formulation of the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973, Razzaq said the “intention" of formulation of the law was to try 195 Pakistani army officials, who were “prisoners of war”.
Razzaq said the government has incorporated “any individual or group of individuals" with the ICT Act, 1973 bringing its amendment in 2009, but the then government expunged almost similar words from the ICT Act's bill in 1973 only to try the members of armed and their auxiliary forces.
“The government brought the amendment to try civilians only for political purposes,” he added.
There was a separate law -- the Collaborator Order, 1972 — to try the civilians who committed crimes during the war, said Razzaq, adding that there is no scope to try Mollah under the ICT Act, 1973.
But the indictment order says, "It appears that the offences punishable under the Penal Code was scheduled in the Collaborator Order, 1972, while the 1973 Act was enacted to prosecute and try the crimes against humanity, genocide and other system crimes committed in violation of customary international law.
“In the case [Quader Mollah's case] in hand, we have found that there are sufficient grounds to presume prima facie that the accused was associated with the perpetration of the offences enumerated in the 1973 Act,” the order further says.
Razzaq said the 195 Pakistani army officials, who were the principal perpetrators, were given clemency through a tripartite agreement among Bangladesh, India and Pakistan in 1974, and after 40 years "their aides and abettors” were being prosecuted.
“Do you think that aides or abettors couldn't be tried unless bringing the principal perpetrators under trial?” asked Judge Shahinur Islam.
Razzaq replied in the affirmative.
The indictment order says, “Such agreement [tripartite] indeed was an executive act that cannot provide any premium to other per-petrators committing offences in breach of customary international law for the reason of forgiveness or immunity shown to those 195 war criminals.
“The Act of 1973 has enumerated abetting and aiding as distinct offence and punishable there under,” it adds.
Razzaq said the trial was being held after 40 years, but the prosecution failed to give a reasonable explanation for the delay.
"I wouldn't say that the trial can't be held after such delay, but there should be a reasonable explanation for it. But the prosecution have failed to do it,” said Razzaq and gave examples of war crimes trial across the world.
“The purpose of the trial is political and that is why this delay,” added Razzaq.
The tribunal asked
Mohammad Ali, conducting prosecutor of the case, to give their reply in this regard.
Razzaq is set to resume his arguments today.
Meanwhile, the tribunal yesterday modified its earlier order fining Mollah Tk 10,000 apparently for “obstructing expeditious disposal of the case”.
The tribunal asked Mollah's counsel Farid Uddin Khan, instead of his client, to pay Tk 5,000 to Anjuman Mofidul Islam, a voluntary organisation providing humanitarian services, as he had admitted his faults.
On January 3, the tribunal fined Mollah as he filed four almost similar petitions for more defence witnesses and asked his counsels to give a compliance report yesterday.
But Farid Uddin yesterday said his client was not responsible for the fault and as a counsel he was responsible and sought exoneration from the fine.
The tribunal modified its order and asked Farid to give compliance report tomorrow.
ICT-1
The defence of war crimes accused Ghulam Azam yesterday prayed to the International Crimes Tribunal-1 to adjourn the day's proceeding but could not show any strong reasons forthat.
The tribunal however accepted the petition and adjourned the proceeding for the 'ends of justice' until today.
Justice Jahangir Hossain Selim and Justice Anwarul Haque conducted the proceedings.
Yesterday was fixed for the prosecution's argument in the case.
The defence prayed to the tribunal that they had filed a petition to allow them produce their witness before the argument, though they could not produce any of their witnesses yesterday.
Prosecutor Zead Al Malum opposed their petition saying the defence had been allowed adjournment four times earlier and prayed the tribunal to allow him to begin his argument.
The tribunal directed the defence to produce their witness today without failure.
War crimes accused Delawar Hossain Sayedee's counsel had filed two petitions with the tribunal to bring contempt of court proceedings against a journalist of private television channel ATN Bangla and the director general and a reporter of Bangladesh Television (BTV) for interfering with the administration of justice and prejudicing the case.
The tribunal fixed January 10 for hearing of the petitions.