Today the Tribunal was adjourned in honor of Bangladesh’s Independence Day.
Monthly Archives: April 2013
27 March 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Hartal, Shortened Coverage
Due to today’s hartal (strike) our researchers were unable to attend proceedings. We have compiled the following short summary from media sources as well as through conversations with the Prosecution and the Defense.
Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:
- Chief Prosecutor vs. Muhammad Kamaruzzaman
In the Kamaruzzaman case the Prosecution continued their Closing Arguments, addressing the evidentiary aspects of Charges 4 – 7. Prosecutor Saiful Islam evaluated the testimony of the prosecution witnesses in relation to each charge.
CHARGE 4: Killing of Golam Mostafa
Date of Occurrence: 23 August 1971.
Place of Occurrence: Serih Bridge, Gridda Narayanpur village, Mostafabag, Sherpur.
Witnesses in Support of Charge: Prosecution Witnesses 2, 5 and 14.
Charge 4 concerns the murder of a civilian named Golam Mostafa who was allegedly taken from College Morh on Mostafabag Thana Road and taken to Serih Bridge where he was killed. Another victim by the name of Abul Kasem was taken with Golam Mostafa but managed to escape after being shot by jumping into the river flowing under the bridge.
25 March 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Kamaruzzaman Prosecution Closing Arguments
Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:
- Chief Prosecutor vs. Muhammad Kamaruzzaman
The day’s proceedings began later than usual due to the late arrival of senior Prosecutor Saiful Islam. The court sat at 10:35 A.M but adjourned for half an hour after waiting for the Prosecutor to arrive. After his arrival the Tribunal reconvened and chastised the Prosecutor for his tardiness. They warned that he would face sanctions if similar incidents occured in the future. The prosecutor then moved on to address the evidentiary aspects of each of the charges against Kamaruzzaman.
Charge 1: Torture and murder of Badiuzzaman
Date of Occurrence: 29 June 1971 and 30 June 1971.
Place of Occurrence: Ahammad Nagar Army Camp
Witnesses in support of the Charge: Prosecution witnesses 4 and 6.
Both the prosecution witnesses in support of this charge provided testimony based on hearsay evidence. Prosecution witness 6 additionally gave testimony in relation to some circumstantial evidence. The testimony of Prosecution witness 4 involves multiple hearsay, meaning that the information was relayed through more than one person before being received by the witness. Prosecution witness 6 testified that Kamaruzzaman accompanied the group who abducted the victim. The Prosecution argued that they have evidence showing that the accused led the group. However, the judges stated that such evidence would not be of high significance because Charge 1 against Kamaruzzaman is not framed under Section 4(2) of the ICT Act of 1973, which provides for liability due to command responsibility.
25 March 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Chowdhury Cross-Examination of PW 23
25 March 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary –
Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:
- Contempt Proceedings vs. the Economist – Reply from Respondent
- Chief Prosecutor vs. Salauddin Qader Chowdhury – Hearing of Request for Police Escort, Prosecution Witness 23
Today Mustafizur Rahman, counsel for the named respondents in the contempt proceedings against the Economist, submitted their reply and the Tribunal fixed 24 April 2013 for a hearing. The South Asian Bureau Chief of the Economist and the Chief Editor of the London based weekly were named in contempt proceedings that the Tribunal initiated on 6 December 2012. The Tribunal issued a notice asking them to show cause why action for interference with the ongoing trials and violating the privacy of a judge in conjunction with the publication of alleged skype conversations between the former Tribunal 1 Chairman and foreign lawyer Ahmed Ziauddin.
Today the Tribunal also heard arguments from Ahsanul Huq Hena, Senior Defense Counsel for Salauddin Qader Chowdhury, in support of his application for police protection coming to the Tribunal during hartal (strike) days. The advocate submitted that he represents Salauddin Qader Chowdhury, Mobarak Hossain alias Mobarak Ali, and Abdul Alim. Hena stated that he is does not belong to any political party and comes to court in a professional context. He further submitted that on his way to the Tribunal he has been followed and threatened in offensive language by people outside the court. Because he resides far away from the Tribunal and has to cross several areas to come to the Tribunal, Hena stated that it is unsafe and troublesome for him to attend proceedings during hartal days.
Prosecutor Sultan Mahmud Simon agreed with the Defense application and stated that if the provisions of law (he did not make it clear which law) allowed Prosecution counsel to receive police protection then Defense Counsel should be similarly assisted. The Tribunal verbally allowed the Defense application and asked Prosecutor Sultan Mahmud Simon to communicate the Tribunal’s approval to the police. The Tribunal also scheduled 27 March as the date for passing its order regarding this application.
After hearing the Defense application, the Tribunal then turned to the Defense’s cross-examination of Prosecution witness 23, Bano Gopal Dash. After the completion of the cross-examination the Tribunal adjourned the proceedings of the case until 27 March 2013.
Weekly Digest Issue 7: 3-7 March
This week’s Weekly Digest follows Tribunal 1’s progress in the Gholam Azam case where the Defense continued its Closing Arguments. Additionally, the report contains a summary of witness testimony in the Salauddin Qader Chowdhury case. The Tribunal also formally took cognizance of the charges against Mubarak Hossain and ordered that he be detained in jail this week.
Turning to Tribunal 2, the report details developments in the Mujahid, Kamaruzzaman, and Alim cases and additionally addressed several ongoing contempt proceedings. In the Mujahid case the Tribunal disposed of three Defense applications and heard the direct examination of Prosecution witnesses 14, 15 and 16. In Kamaruzzaman the Tribunal heard testimony from Defense witnesses 1, 2 and 3. In the case of Abdul Alim they heard testimony from Prosecution witness 12. Finally the court dealt with ongoing contempt proceedings against Jamaat leaders, the Daily Shongram, and MK Anwar.
Please read the full report here: Weekly Digest, Issue 7 – March 3-7
The Bangladesh Trial Observer 