Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Mobarak
2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Zahid Hossain Khokon

Mobarak Hossain

In the case against Mobarak Hossain, today was set for recording the testimony of the Defense Witness 1. However, the senior Defense Counsel for Mobarak Hossain was absent, and the junior Defense Counsel sought two days adjournment on behalf of Senior Counsel. The Tribunal allowed the motion, and adjourned the proceedings of the case until 11 December 2013.

Zahid Hossain Khokon

In the case against Zahid Hossain Khokon, the Tribunal recorded the testimony of Sree Rabindra Nath Datta, Prosecution Witness 10, and Sree Jogonnath Datta, Prosecution Witness 11.  State-appointed Defense Counsel cross-examined the witnesses. Both testified in support of Charge 4. Following conclusion of their testimony, the Tribunal adjourned the proceedings of the case until tomorrow, 10 December 2013. 

Examination-in-Chief of PW-10

Sree Rabindra Nath Datta, Prosecution witness 10, testified that he was 20 years old in 1971 and used to work with his father in their paddy field. He testified that on 27 May 1971 around 10 am, Razakar Khokon, his brother Zafor, and other Razakars attacked their village. He hid in a bamboo bush, from where he saw Khokon catch Radha Rani Datta as she was running to hide and forcibly take her inside the house of Surendra Nath Datta. He testified that he saw flames and heard sounds of firing coming from the house of Bhubon Mohon Datta. He testified that after a few minutes, he saw Khokon and other Razakars enter into his house; they looted and set fire to the house and temple and left the site. The witness stated that he then came out from the bamboo bush and, hearing the crying of the women and children, went towards the house of Surendra Nath Datta. From the house, Radha Rani asked for a cloth, and when she came out wearing the cloth, he noticed signs of torture on her body. Radha Rani informed them that Khokon had raped her.

The witness found the burned house of Bhubon Mohon Datta, and his wife and her daughters informed him that Khokon and his accomplices had looted their house and set it on fire. He testified that he then went towards the house of Omulla Bonik, and he learned from Khuku that she had been raped by Razakars. At that time, he found a group of freedom fighters, including Abu Bokor, Rashid, and Fakir, led by freedom fighter commander Aziz Molla at the site; they went there after learning of the attack. The witness testified that on 29 May 1971, a fight took place at Chader hat between Razakars, the Pakistani Army and the freedom fighters. During the fight, Zafor Razakar, some of the Pakistani Army, and three civilians were killed. He then testified that on 30 May 1971, the Pakistani Army—led by Khokon—attacked Kodalia village, where they killed unarmed civilians and looted and set fire to the houses. He acknowledged giving an interview to the Investigating Officer and testified that Khokon is absent from the Tribunal.

Cross-Examination of PW- 10

The state Defense Counsel claimed that Khokon was Ansar Commandar, but the witness replied that he did not know this. The Defense then claimed that Atahar Razakar and Zoinal Razakar had been killed by freedom fighters, and the witness admitted this. The Defense asked the witness how many Razakars attacked their village on 27 May 1971, and the witness replied about 15 or 16 Razakars. The Defense claimed that on 27 May 1971, Khokon did not go to their village and did not rape Radha Rani. The witness responded that this was false. The Defense then asked the witness if Radha Rani is still alive, and the witness replied that she is now in India. The Defense stated that the witness, during his initial interview to the Investigating Officer, did not say that the wife of Bhubon Mohon Datta informed him that Khokon and his accomplices looted and set fire to their house. The Defense claimed that, during his initial interview to the Investigating Officer, the witness did not mention the incident of 30 May 1971. However, the witness replied that he mentioned all of these to the Investigating Officer. The Defense stated that Khokon did not commit any offence like rape, killing, looting, or arson. The Defense further claimed that Khokon was not a Razakar, and the witness gave false testimony accusing Khokon just to undermine his reputation because he is the mayor of the Nogorkanda municipality area. The witness denied all of these claims.

Examination-in-Chief of PW-11

Jogonnath Datta, Prosecution witness 11, testified that on 27 May 1971 at 10am, Khokon his brother Zafor and other Razakars entered into their village equipped with arms. He hid in a bamboo bush and saw his father, uncles Onukul Datta and Horon Datta, and others—in total 15 or 16 persons—standing in a line and being asked to give money and gold. Feeling frightened, his aunty Shuchitra Datta brought 42 ounces of gold and other valuable goods from their house and put them in the courtyard. When the Razakars were busy collecting the goods, Jogonnath’s elder brother Vabesh Datta escaped from the site and informed the freedom fighter commander Aziz Mollah. He testified that then Khokon and other Razakars set their house and temple on fire and then went towards the home of Surendra Nath Datta. He testified that he saw Radha Rani being forcibly taken by Khokon and that Khokon and other Razakars also looted the house and temple of Rabindra Nath Datta and set them on fire. He testified that Khokon and his accomplices also raped a relative of his uncle who was named Khuku Moni. The witness added that when the Razkars left their village, they came back to their home and found their burned house and heard from Radha Rani that Khokon had raped her. Jogonnath then stated that on 29 May 1971, a fight took place between Razakars, the Pakistani Army and freedom fighters at Chadhat and in that fight, Zafor, some of the Pakistani Army and three civilian—including Nuru—were killed. He acknowledged giving an interview to the Investigating Officer and testified that Khokon is not present at the dock.

Cross-Examination of PW-11          

The state appointed Defense Counsel asked the witness whether he had participated in the Liberation War, to which the witness replied in the negative. The Defense asked the witness how he knew Khokon, and he replied that Khokon went to their area during the election and campaigned for Jamaat-e-Islami. The Defense claimed that Khokon did not go to their area for campaigning, and the witness responded that this was false. The state Defense Counsel then claimed that Khokon was Ansar Commandar, and the witness replied that this is not true. The Defense claimed that Khokon received training for and participated in the Liberation War. The witness denied these suggestions. The Defense asked the witness how long he was hiding in the bamboo bush on 27 May 1971, and the witness replied that he hid there for an hour. The Defense claimed that the witness personally did not witness the alleged incidents, and the witness replied that he did. The Defense then asked the witness when the freedom fighters came to the site. The witness stated that they arrived about a half hour after the alleged incident. The Defense claimed that the witness did not personally witness the alleged rape of Khuku Moni. The witness admitted this. The Defense asked the witness whether there were any other persons who witnessed the incident of 27 May 1971 and whether they are still alive. The witness replied that there were many who witnessed the incident with him from the bamboo bush, but that they were not still alive. The Defense claimed that the witness, during his initial interview to the Investigating Officer, did not say that Radha Rani had told him that she had been raped by Khokon. The witness replied that this is not true. The Defense claimed that no Razakars of the witness’s area are still alive. The witness clarified that, except Khokon, no Razakar of his area is alive. The Defense claimed that the witness’s testimony regarding the incident of 27 May 2013, rape, arson attack and looting are not true. The witness denied this.