Category Archives: Tribunal 1

14 March 2013: ICT 1 Daily Summary – Gholam Azam Defense Closing Arguments

The Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Gholam Azam – Defense Closing Arguments

On 14 March 2013 Defense Counsel Mizanul Islam continued the closing arguments for the 4th day. Thereafter, Tribunal adjourned the proceedings of the Gholam Azam’s case until 18 March 2013.

After the lunch break the Prosecution introduced new Prosecutor Turin Afroz to the Judges of the Tribunal 1. The Chairman said that Tribunal 1 would hear arguments from Prosecutor Turin Afroz and Defense Counsel Imran Siddique for one hour on 18 March regarding the issue of whether a civilian can have superior command responsibility.

Continue reading

13 March 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Gholam Azam Defense Closing Arguments

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Gholam Azam –Defense Closing Arguments

The Defense continued closing arguments for the 3rd day. They submitted their arguments regarding the testimony of Prosecution witnesses 1, 2 and 3.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Gholam Azam
At the beginning of the Tribunal’s proceedings Defense counsel Mizanul Islam submitted that on March 11, 2013 he mistakenly claimed that under the Collaborators Act 1972 a member of Razakar, Al-Badr, Al-Shams and Peace Committee could be punished based on the membership alone. He corrected himself, stating that under the Collaborators Act 1972 it was crime to fight against freedom fighters. He confirmed that Prosecution relied on Exhibit-519 which he discussed before.

Prosecution Witness 1
Regarding Exhibit-FD, the Defense argued that the author, Prosecution witness 1, had made no comment regarding the list of Peace Committee members mentioned on page no 200. He submitted that the witness did not mention any source or reference for this information. He drew the Tribunal’s attention to the research works of M.A Hasan and Muntasir Mamun (Prosecution witness 1), in which different names were given for the post of Secretary of Peace Committee. The Defense raised doubts about the reliability of the authors’ research. Additionally they argued that there was no gazette notification, circular or order from the government or from any forces of the government which authorized or declared Peace Committee as an auxiliary force. Mizanul Islam submitted that the first duty of the Prosecution was to prove that the Peace Committee was an armed force before considering them as auxiliary force.

Continue reading

12 March 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary: Gholam Azam Defense Adjournment, Chowdhury PW 21, Mubarak Hossain Cognizance of Charges

12 March 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary

The Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Gholam Azam –  Defense Closing Arguments
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Salauddin Qader Chowdhury –  Testimony of PW 21
  3. Investigation of Mubarak Hossain – Cognizance of Charges

On March 12, 2013 a junior Defense counsel for Gholam Azam sought adjournment saying that senior Defense attorney Mizanul Islam could not attend due to the personal difficulties. The Tribunal accepted the Defense prayer and adjourned the proceedings of the Gholam Azam’s case until March 13. The charged the Defense taka 1,000 for the cost of the delay.

The Tribunal took cognizance of the formal charge against Mubarak Hossain and ordered him to be detained in jail, rejecting the Defense request for an extension of bail. The Tribunal fixed 4 April 2013 for the next date of hearing.

In the Chowdhury case Prosecution witness 21, Abul Bashar, testified before the Tribunal. Thereafter, Tribunal adjourned the proceedings of the Chowdhury case until 18 March 2013.

Continue reading

11 March 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Gholam Azam Closing Arguments, Mubarak Hossain Pre-Trial Proceedings

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs Gholam Azam: Defense Closing Arguments (Accused Not Present)
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs Mubarak Hossain: Pre-Trial Proceedings, Cognizance of Charges to be Announced Tomorrow (Accused Not Present)

On March 11, 2013 Defense counsel Mizanul Islam continued the Closing Arguments for the 2nd consecutive day. He submitted arguments regarding Prosecution witnesses 16 and 1. Thereafter, Tribunal adjourned the proceedings of the Gholam Azam’s case until tomorrow, 12 March 2013.

The case against Mubarak Hossain was listed in the Cause List as being scheduled for Cognizance. The Chairman of Tribunal 1 asked the Prosecution to provide the Formal Charge, list of witnesses and other relevant documents to Mubarak Hossain’s Defense counsel, as the Prosecution admitted that they have not yet served the documents to the Defense. Prosecutor Haider Ali drew the Tribunal’s attention to the Cause List where the case was listed as a miscellaneous case instead of a separate case. Thereafter the Tribunal decided to give its order tomorrow (12 March 2013) regarding the Tribunal’s cognizance of the charges.

Continue reading