& 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

Nizami's War Crimes Trial

Defence cuts number of witnesses to 25

Staff Correspondent
The defence of Jamaat chief Motiur Rahman Nizami who once claimed 10,111 witnesses were needed to prove their client's innocence now wantonly 25 of them.
Abdur Razzaq, chief of the defence of war crimes accused Jamaat-e-lslami leaders, yesterday told the International Crimes Tribunal-1 that they needed only 25 witnesses to disprove the 12 out of 16 charges framed against Nizami.
The tribunal framed 16 charges against Nizami for his alleged involvement in crimes against humanity and genocide during the Liberation War. The prosecution produced 26 witnesses to prove the 12 charges and depended on documentary evidence for the rest.
Raising eyebrows of many, the defence submitted a list of 10,111 witnesses on July 22 last year. The prosecution termed the "huge list" part of the defence's dilatory strategies.
With the examination of the prosecution witnesses at the last stage, the prosecution submitted a petition to the tribunal last week for curtailing the number of defence witnesses, while the defence counsels said they themselves would submit a shorter list.
When the defence yesterday submitted a list of 25 witness, prosecutor Mohammad Ali said, "The onus of proving the charges solely falls upon the prosecution.
"There is no need of defence witnesses," he said, adding, even if the defence were allowed witnesses, that number should be limited like the war crimes cases already disposed of or await-ingverdicts.
Defence lawyer Tajul Islam, however, told The Daily Star the list was shortened as they believed 25 witnesses were enough, which was not understandable at the beginning of the trial when they had submitted the list.
"Besides, the prosecution have shortened the case," he added.
But, prosecutor Tureen Afroz told The Daily Star it was not the duty of the defence to disprove charges, their duty was to cast doubt on the charges framed against the accused.
"If they have an alibi, they can produce two or three witnesses," she said, adding, "They [defence] are senior lawyers. They also know it as well. I think they filed the application to make the trial process lengthy."
About alibi, Tajul said adducing defence witnesses did not depend on the presence of alibi as per the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973.
Tajul rejected the prosecution's allegation that the "huge list" was submitted to delay the case proceedings.
In other war crimes cases, the defence similarly submitted "huge lists” of witnesses, but the tribunals curtailed the lists.