Category Archives: Contempt Proceedings

14 Feb 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Contempt Proceedings, Kamaruzzaman Cross-Examination of PW 18

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Contempt Proceedings against Home Minister Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Muhammad Kamaruzzaman: Cross-Examination of PW 18 (Accused Present)

The Tribunal first heard a request for more time on behalf of the Home Minister, Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir, who is facing contempt charges based on comments made about the timing of verdicts to be issued by the Tribunal.

The court then proceeded to the case against Muhammad Kamaruzzaman wherein defense counsel Mr Kafil Uddin Chowdhury resumed the cross-examination of PW-18, Mr Abdur Razzaq,  the Investigation Officer of the case.  Continue reading →

7 Feb 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Kamaruzzaman re-examination of PW 16, Contempt against Jamaat

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Muhammad Kamaruzzaman – Re-examination of prosecution witness  (Accused Not Present)

At the beginning of the day’s proceedings senior Defense counsel Mr Tajul Islam  expressed his concern and dissatisfaction regarding access and entry of defense counsel at the Tribunal gate.

The court then moved to Muhammad Kamaruzzaman’s case wherein the prosecution witness PW-16, Mr. Azabuddin Miah, was re-examined by the Prosecution. Mr. Miah is the Assistant Librarian of Bangla Academy (Newspaper Branch) and is testifying before the tribunal as to the authenticity of various newspapers collected from the Bangla Academy archive by the Investigation Officer. Continue reading →

3 Feb 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary: Contempt Proceedings

The Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Contempt Proceedings vs. Home Minister Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir
  2. Contempt Proceedings vs. M.K. Anwar

Home Minister Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir
Before the tribunal proceeded to the day’s listed item, Mr Tajul Islam, a senior Defense counsel, brought comments made by the Home Minister Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir at a program organized by the Bangladesh Mission in Cairo, Egypt to the court’s attention. As reported by three of daily newspapers including Naya Diganta, Amar Desh and the Daily Sangram, the Minister forecasted that the International Crimes Tribunal will deliver its second verdict within this week and the third one in the following week. Upon hearing the counsel’s submission that such comments are derogatory to the public image of the Tribunal and will lead to an adverse inference regarding its fairness, the court asked the Defense to submit a written application before the Tribunal seeking requisite measures for the matter. The court reminded the Defense that the Prosecution had done the same against MK Anwar. Mr Tajul Islam insisted that the Alamgir’s comment injures the Tribunal’s image and hence the Tribunal is best equipped to address the matter suo moto,.

After lunch therefore, the Tribunal pronounced its order requiring the Home Minister to submit an explanation of his comments within 10 days and opined that such comments, if true, coming from a responsible minister are unfortunate and are equivalent to tarnishing the image of the lawfully constituted independent judicial forum. The Tribunal stated that commentary regarding the schedule of verdicts falls within the perimeter of a subjudice matter and no one should make such derogatory remarks.  While passing the aforementioned order, the honorable Chair of the tribunal also cautioned Jamaat leaders from making any comment that might lead them to face similar “show cause” notice.

The Tribunal-2 recently disposed of similar contempt proceedings against another minister, Mr Suranjit Sen Gupta, with a warning and is currently conducting contempt proceedings against a veteran  leader from the opposition party Mr M K Anwar. Sub-judice is a latin term which translates to “under judgment”, meaning that a particular case or matter is under trial or being considered by a judge or court. Commenting on sub-judice matters is considered to be inappropriate in England and Wales and most legal systems with common law origin including Bangladesh.

BNP Leader MK Anwar
Counsel for MK Anwar submitted a prayer for time, stating that he (counsel) was only appointed a day earlier and that he has received instruction from his client to contest the contempt proceedings initiated against him. In order to do so additional time is necessary for preparation. The court, upon stating that the BNP leader could have taken the easier pathway of seeking apology as opposed to contesting the matter, adjourned the matter until 26 February 2013, allowing 3 weeks of time for preparation.

29 Jan 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Contempt Proceedings and Kamaruzzaman documentary evidence

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1.  Warning of Contempt Proceedings against Daily Naya Diganta
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Muhammad Kamaruzzaman: Hearing of application for submission of further documentary evidence (Accused Present)
  3. Contempt Proceedings Against Suranjit Sen Gupta (Accused Not Present)

Comments on Court Administration
Mr Abdul Baset Majumdar, senior counsel for Suranjit Sen Gupta, opened the day’s proceedings by expressing his dissatisfaction with the security clearance procedure at the entrance of the International Crimes Tribunal. He commented that the security often becomes onerous, especially for senior counsel who should be entitled to easier access. He acknowledged the necessity of security protocol but stated the methods and mechanisms employed should be more user-friendly. The Chairman of ICT-2 agreed with Mr Baset, stating that even his car was subject to significant checks at the gates and that the matter will be looked into. In the meantime the court asked counsel for both parties to cooperate.

The court then began hearing arguments in contempt proceedings and within the case of Kamaruzzaman. Continue reading →

24 Jan 2013: ICT 2 Daily Summary – Contempt Proceedings MK Anwar

Today the Tribunal was scheduled to hear matters in the following case:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ali Ahsan Muhammad Mujahid: examination-in-chief of prosecution witness (Accused was Present

However, the court first accepted the Prosecution’s submissions for contempt proceedings to be issued against MK Anwar, a political leader of the BNP Party (an opposition party.)

In accordance with the Court’s verbal instructions on 23 January 2013, the Prosecution submitted a written application in regards to a statement made by MK Anwar seeking contempt proceedings to be issued against him. On 20 January 2013 MK Anwar, a day before ICT-2’s first verdict was issued, commented in his speech marking the 77th birth anniversary of late president Ziaur Rahman that the government is staging the ongoing trials as a mechanism of vengeance against the leaders of opposition parties. Mr Rana Das Gupta, the Prosecution counsel, reiterated  that the BNP leader’s comment is a malicious one, aimed to jeopardize the confidence of the masses as to the neutrality, independence and fairness of the tribunal. The prosecutor submitted that unless some sort of action is initiated against him, he is likely to continue to make such comments. He noted that MK Anwar had previously made similar comments, for which he was warned by Tribunal-1.

The Prosecution advocated for punishment of MK Anwar under section 11(4) of the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973, which accords the tribunal the authority to punish any person who obstructs or abuses its process or disobeys any of its orders or directions, or does anything which tends to prejudice the case of a party before it, or tends to bring it or any of its members into hatred or contempt, or does anything which constitutes contempt of the Tribunal. The Tribunal upon hearing the learned prosecutor retired till lunch to pass an order.

After lunch, the Tribunal pronounced its order requiring MK Anwar to submit an explanation through his lawyers within 7 days. They opined that such comments pertain to subjudice matters, or matters currently under consideration by the Tribunal, and therefore may adversely influence the public perception about the ICT. The Tribunal further observed that the independent judiciary shall be kept segregated from politics in the interest of upholding the rule of law. MK Anwar shall be obliged to submit his explanation no later than 3 February 2013.

It may be noted that Mr Suranjit Sen Gupta, the ruling party’s influential policy maker is also facing contempt proceedings akin to that now faced by Anwar, for previously making comments on sub-judice matters.

Tribunal-2 did not hear the examination-in-chief of the prosecution witness in Ali Ahsan Mujahid’s case and adjourned for the day.