Category Archives: Tribunal 2

16 April 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Kamaruzzaman Final Closing Arguments, Mujahid Cross-Examination of PW 17

The publication of this post was delayed as we were waiting to obtain certain documents from the Prosecution. Please excuse the inconvenience.

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecution vs. Muhammad Kamaruzzaman: Defense application and Conclusion of Prosecution Closing Arguments, Accused Present 
  2. Chief Prosecution vs. Ali Ahsan Muhammad Mujahid: Defense Application and Cross-Examination of Investigation Officer

The Tribunal heard the last of the Prosecution’s Closing Arguments in the Kamaruzzaman  case. Prosecutor Tureen Afroz addressed remaining legal issues including the value of hearsay evidence, inconsistencies and the old evidence rule, and the doctrine of Superior Responsibility under Section 4(2). Two other Prosecutors made additional closing remarks before the Tribunal allowed the Defense to present a brief rebuttal. The case was then closed and the Tribunal officially took it into consideration awaiting verdict.

In the Mujahid case the Tribunal heard a Prosecution application seeking limitation of the number of Defense witnesses allowed. The Defense previously submitted a list of 1500 names listed as possible defense witnesses. After Disposing of the Application and limiting the Defense to three witnesses, the Tribunal then returned to the Defense’s cross-examination of Prosecution witness 17, the Investigation Officer.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Kamaruzzaman
Defense Application for Opportunity to Make Statement
At the beginning of the day’s proceedings, the defense submitted an application on behalf of the accused under Section 17(1) and (2) of the ICT Act seeking permission for the Accused to make a statement before the Tribunal. Section 17(1) provides that the Accused “shall have the right to give any explanation relevant to the charge mage against him.” Section 17(2) allows the Accused to conduct his own Defense or to have the assistance of counsel.

The Prosecution opposed the application and stated that such a statement could only be allowed while the Tribunal is hearing witnesses. However, Closing Arguments are taking place and there is no such right at this stage of proceedings.

The Judges quickly rejected the application and agreed with the Prosecution’s interpretation of the Statute.  Continue reading →

28 April 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Charge Framing Order to be Issued Against Chowdhury Moinuddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan

The Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Chowdhury Moinuddin – Scheduling of Charge Framing Order
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ashrafuzzaman Khan – Scheduling of Charge Framing Order

 Tribunal 2 was briefly in session today. They scheduled Thursday, 2 May 2013, for issuing the Charge Framing Orders against Chowdhury Moinuddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan. Both are charged with the killing of Bangladeshi intellectuals during the eve of Bangladesh’s victory on 16 December 1971. The Prosecution submitted the proposed Formal Charge to the Tribunal on 25 April 2013. The 16 Charges allege the Accused killed at least 18 intellectuals between 10 December and 15 December 1971, amounting to Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity.

AIJI is in the process of obtaining copies of the Charge Framing Orders and will post them on our website once they are available.

25 April 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Alim Cross-Examination PW 17

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Alim – Prosecution Witness 17
  2. Submission of Formal Charges against Chowdhury Moinuddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan

The case against Abdul Alim was the lone case scheduled in Tribunal 2 for today. Defense counsel Ahsanul Huq Hena very briefly cross-examined Mr Abdus Sobhan Sardar who gave testimony against the accused as Prosecution witness 17.

Additionally, the Prosecution submitted Formal Charges and related documents against Mr. Chowdhury Moinuddin and Mr. Ashrafuzzaman Khan. 16 charges have been proposed by the Prosecution against these two new accused, both of whom live outside of Bangladesh.

The Defense suggested did not attempt to discredit the witness’ prior testimony in a targeted manner. They alleged that the Abdul Alim never went to Akkelpur during in 1971. Despite the Defense’s suggestions the witness affirmed his statement that the Razakars said that detainees could be released only with permission from Alim. The witness said that Alim gave a short speech in Akkelpur in Suleman Kabiraz’s Mill ghor. He said that the Accused warned those present that their land was part of Pakistan and that agents from India would not be tolerated.

After this brief examination the court adjourned for the day.