& 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

ICT Notice on Zafrullah, Mahfuz Ullah

51 eminent citizens express concern

Staff Correspondent
Fifty one eminent citizens yesterday expressed concern over the show cause notice served on Zafrullah Chowdhury, Mahfuz Ullah and others to explain why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against them for commenting on the trial.
International Crimes Tribunal-1 issued the notice on September 26 on five Channel 24 officials and three others, two days after the prosecution submitted a petition.
The petition drew attention to the September 18 episode of Channel 24's talk show "Muktobaak" where Zafrullah, trustee of Gonoshasthaya Kendra, and Mahfuz, secretary general of Centre for Sustainable Development, were present.
It said both Zafrullah and Mahfuz had claimed the rights of war crimes accused Salauddin Quader Chowdhury had been violated as the tribunal did not allow him to produce witnesses. The tribunal fixed December 24 to hear the reply.
In a joint statement, the eminent citizens opined that such initiatives by the tribunal are threatening to free thought, creativity and freedom of speech and the mass media.
They said they failed to comprehend why Zafrullah's speech was now being considered contemptuous as questions over not allowing Salauddin to produce witnesses were raised in some national dailies much earlier.
They observed that to keep the war crimes trial above all controversy, expressing "logical concern" over the trial's different aspects is a constitutionally recognised fundamental right of every citizen.
They stated to have noticed with concern that the tribunal, willingly or on the basis of petitions, had issued contempt of court proceedings against some persons in the last few months.
FROM PAGE 5
However, the tribunal had not taken into consideration several untoward speeches some ministers and politicians of the ruling party made on the trial which are tantamount to contempt of court, they said.
Such incongruity may raise questions in people's minds over the tribunal's jurisdiction in issuing contempt of court rules, they added.
They urged effective steps to ensure that the tribunal and the High
Court consider freedom of speech and the media to be supportive to their work.
Dr Shahdeen Malik, Dr Hamida Hossain, Khushi Kabir, Dr Debapriya Bhattacharya and Prof Amena Mohsin were among the signatories.