Category Archives: Tribunal 2

22 September 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Abdul Alim, Prosecution rebuttal and Defense application on extension of bail

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following case:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Alim

Tribunal 2 allowed Prosecutor Dr. Tureen Afroz to briefly make closing comments in rebuttal to Defense closing submissions. The Tribunal also heard and rejected a Defense application for the extension of bail of the Accused. The Tribunal then declared that the case of Abdul Alim was to be put as CAV (Curia advisari vult), a latin legal term meaning that the court wished to take the evidence under consideration for a final Judgment.

Prosecution Rebuttal and Closing Comments

Prosecutor Dr. Tureen Afroz advised the Court that she would try to briefly rebut some of the issues raised by the defense, address some of the legal questions raised by the judges during Defense closing submissions, and make submissions on sentencing. Continue reading →

19 September 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Hartal Coverage of Abdul Alim, Defense Closing Arguments; Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddin, PW-25 Examination

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Alim
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddin

It was the second day of a 48-hour countrywide shut down called by Jamaat-e-Islam. Due to the Hartal, our monitors could not safely travel to the Court to attend proceedings.  The following coverage was compiled from official court records and communication with the parties to the proceedings.

On this day, Mr. Ahsanul Haq Hena, the defense counsel for the accused Abdul Alim concluded his closing submissions before Tribunal 2 of the ICT. This was the fifth day of the Defense submission.  Counsel addressed evidentiary aspects of the remaining charges faced by the Accused. He also made submissions pertaining to the defense claim of alibi. Counsel concluded by declaring that none of the charges had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the Prosecution.

Following the conclusion of Defense submissions, the Court announced that Dr. Tureen Afroz would be given limited time on Sunday, 22 September 2013 to briefly address or rebut Defense submissions. The trial can therefore be expected to conclude on Sunday, 22 September 2013, pending final Judgment.

In the case against Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddinm, the Tribunal finished recording the cross-examination of PW-25, Mr. Ataur Rahman, one of the two investigation officers assigned to the case against Mueen and Ashraf. PW-25 was specifically assigned to investigate the involvement of Chowdhury Mueen Uddin. This marked the end of witness testimony, as the IO was the 25th and last prosecution witness of the case. The prosecution is scheduled to begin closing arguments on 23 September 2013.

18 September 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Hartal Coverage of Abdul Alim, Defense Closing Arguments; Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddin, PW-25 Examination

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Alim
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddin

This was was the first day of a 48-hour countrywide shut down called by Jamaat-e-Islam. Due to the Hartal, our monitors could not safely travel to the Court to attend proceedings.  The following coverage was compiled from official court records and communication with the parties to the proceedings.

On this day, Mr. Ahsanul Haq Hena, the defense counsel for the accused Abdul Alim continued his closing submissions for the 4th day, before Tribunal 2 of the ICT. Counsel addressed evidentiary aspects of charges 4 through 10 of the indictment against the Accused. The Tribunal requested that Counsel conclude the closing submission the following day.

In the case against Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddinm, the Tribunal continued to record the testimony of PW-25, Mr. Ataur Rahman, one of the two investigation officers of the case against Mueen and Ashraf. PW-25 was specifically assigned to investigate the involvement of Chowdhury Mueen Uddin. The State-appointed defense counsel, Ms. Salma Hye Tuni, commenced the cross-examination of the witness. Cross Examination is scheduled to conclude tomorrow.

17 September 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Abdul Alim, Defense Closing Arguments; Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddin, PW-25 Examination

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Alim
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddin

Defense counsel for Mr. Abdul Alim continued his closing submission for the third day before Triubal 2. The Tribunal also recorded the testimony of the second Investigation Officer of the case against Chowdhury Mueen Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan. The IO gave testimony as PW-25.

Alim: Defense closing submission on points of law

Defense Counsel, Mr. Ahsanul Haque Hena, continued his legal submissions on behalf of his client, Abdul Alim. He commenced his submission for the third day by discussing the issue of Shaon Lal Bajla’s Godighar (sitting room).  He then proceeded to discuss specific evidence pertaining to each of the charges, in turn. Continue reading →

16 September 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Abdul Alim, Defense Closing Arguments; Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddin, PW-24 Examination

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Alim
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ashrafuzzaman Khan & Chowdhury Mueen Uddin

Defense counsel for the Accused, Mr. Abdul Alim, continued his closing submission before Triubal 2. The Court also recorded the cross examination of the Investigation Officer who gave testimony as PW-24 in the case against Chowdhury Mueen Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan.

Alim case: Defense closing submissions on points of law

Defense Counsel, Mr. Ahsanul Haque Hena, continued his legal submissions on behalf of his client, Abdul Alim. He began the session by focusing on general points about the political structure of the parties existing in 1971.  He argued that this historical information was pertinent to help the Court understand any ties the Accused had with these political parties. Continue reading →