& 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

Existing law inadequate

Law minister on trying political party for war crimes

Staff Correspondent
Law Minster Anisul Huq yesterday said the amended war crimes act was not enough to try and punish any political party for its alleged crimes during the Liberation War in 1971.
"There is no provision in the International Crimes [Tribunals] Act, 1973, which was amended later, to try and punish any political party," Anisul Huq told reporters.
The minister came up with the observation after 15 months of the latest amendment to the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1971 that aimed to try organisations for committing war crimes.
The House in February last year passed the amendment following an immense public pressure, but the amendment, like the original Act, does not propose a provision for punishment of an organisation, if found guilty.
Prominent war crimes researcher Shahriar Kabir rules out the law minister's daim terming it "ridiculous" and saying Anisul made the comment "out of ignorance about the ICT Act".
The minister's comment had hurt and frustrated the victims and families of the martyrs, said Shahriar, executive
FROM PAGE 20
president of Ekattorer Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee, which has been campaigning for war crimes trial for two decades.
After the amendment, an investigation agency in August last year launched a probe into the war crimes allegedly committed by Jamaat-e-Islam as a party. The agency handed over the probe report to the prosecution in March this year.
The agency has recommended banning Jamaat and six organisations, which were associated with the party in 1971, as the investigators have found involvement of these anti-liberation bodies in grievous crimes committed during the war.
After receiving the probe report and other documents, a sevenmember prosecution team started working to prepare formal charges for initiating trial and the work was at the final stage.
But, the preparation for filing a case against Jamaat remained suspended since May 19 following an internal feud in the prosecution team.
On the probe into Jamaat's alleged crimes, Anisul Huq yesterday said: "It is true that there is a probe report, but at this stage, I have to move forward considering other perspectives."
Apparently raising a question
about the necessity of the trial, the minister said the bigwigs of the political party | Jamaat] had already been brought to the book for their war crimes.
"We have to think at this stage that if you punish them [Jamaat leaders] for a second time, it might contradict with the punishment they have already received," he argued.
The law minister however ruled out any negotiations between the Awami League and Jamaat.
Asked why he was talking about the matter after 15 months of the amendment, Anisul, who became the law minister on January 12, said: "I am talking about the matter as you (journalists] have asked me today.”
The minister's statement however contradicts with his previous comment made to The Daily Star on March 25 and was published on March 26, a day after the investigation agency had completed its investigation into Jamaat's alleged crimes on March 25 this year.
Asked about the absence of a provision in the Act stipulating punishment of any organisation if found guilty, Anisul Huq had said: "I will soon issue a statement explaining the issue."
When this correspondent yesterday asked the minister if the government would bring further amend-
ment to the Act, he replied: "I would not make any further comment."
Individuals, justice seekers and war crimes victims and their families have long been demanding trial of Jamaat as a party.
The demand gained momentum in February last year when the youth occupied the Shahbagh intersection in the capital calling for the highest punishment to be handed down on war criminals and a ban on Jamaat and its associate student body Islami Chhatra Shibir.
Following the protests, the government amended the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973, allowing the state to appeal against inadequate sentencing and paving the way for trial of organisations on charges of war crimes.
However, some legal experts say the Act has no provision to hand down punishment on any organisations and the law should be amended again before the trial starts.
The investigation agency and the prosecution have, however, dismissed the view saying Jamaat can be punished for war crimes under the General Clauses Act.
Asked about the new development, Tureen Afroz, who has been leading the seven-member prosecution team to prepare the Jamaat case, declined to comment.