Category Archives: Trial of A.M Alim

23 January 2013: ICT 2 Daily Summary

The Tribunal heard the following cases:

  1. Contempt Proceedings against Suranjit Sen Gupta
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs.  Abdul Alim: Cross examination of Prosecution Witness (Accused Present)
  3. Chief Prosecutor vs. Muhammad Kamaruzzaman: Examination-in-Chief of Prosecution Witness  (Accused Present)

At the beginning of the day’s proceedings, Mr Rana Das Gupta, counsel for the prosecution brought to the court’s attention the comments made by MK Anwar, a member of BNP standing committee on January 20th, a day before the announcement of ICT-2’s first judgment. Mr Gupta submitted that the BNP veteran’s comment – that the ongoing trials of the war criminals have been staged by the government to serve its political purposes – will adversely affect the public perception as to the tribunal’s independence. The chair of the tribunal in response to the prosecution’s averment opined that such a statement is purely a political one and it is correct to say that the Government’s decision to form the International Crimes Tribunals was an executive decision and that is a part of the ruling party’s political manifesto. The Tribunal asked the prosecution to submit a written application precisely enumerating questionable statements made by Gupta.The court made it clear that it will only proceed with contempt proceedings if MK Anwar’s comment appears to be on a sub-judice matter. At this point, the court expressed its appreciation for Defense counsel Tajul Islam, for his comment to the media whereby he stated that the judgment in the case against Abul Kalam Azad Bacchu will not affect the decision of other pending cases.

Counsel for Mr Suranjit Sen Gupta requested adjournment of the hearing due to the unavailability of senior counsel. The court accepted the request and stated that it will fix and notify the next date for hearing.

The court then moved to Abdul Alim’s case wherein the prosecution witness PW-9, Mr Jahidul Islam was cross examined by the defense counsel, whose core line of questioning was aimed to undermine the credibility of the witness, suggesting that the testimony has been concocted at the Prosecution’s direction and that the witness could not have seen or heard of the participation of the accused. The case was then adjourned until 4 February 2013.

In the Kamaruzzaman case, Mr Md Azabuddin Miah, the Assistant Librarian of Bangla Academy testified as Prosecution Witness 16. He stated that Mr Abdur Razzak Khan, the Investigation Officer of the case collected a total of 257 paper extracts from daily and weekly papers published during the 1971 liberation war. Of these documents, only 6 extracted items have been exhibited for the tribunal’s perusal in support of the prosecution’s case against the accused. The tribunal disallowed the defense from referring to any other newspaper extracts from the bundle that has not been so exhibited.
Continue reading

15 Jan 2013: ICT 2 Daily Summary – Qader Molla, Alim, Mujahid

The Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Quader Molla – Defense closing arguments  (Accused Present)
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Alim– Examination of Prosecution Witness (Accused Present)
  3. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ali Ahsan Muhammad Mujahid – Examination of Prosecution Witness (Accused Present)

In the case of Qader Molla the Defense continued its closing arguments, attacking the prosecution’s evidence in support of charges 5 and 6. In particular they attacked the credibility of witnesses who had testified in support of the charges. The Tribunal urged them to complete their arguments and stated that they would only have one hour during tomorrow’s session to do so.

In the case against Mujahid, the Prosecution conducted its examination-in-chief of their 12th witness, who provided testimony in support of Charge 7, pertaining to the killing of the witness’ brothe,r Biren Shaha, along with 8 to 9 others from the Hindu community on 13 May 1971.

Finally, in the case against A.M.Alim, the Prosecution conducted its examination-in-chief of their 9th witness, Jahidul Islam, who testified in support of Charge 6, pertaining to the killing of Abdus Salam and nine others in early May 1971, as the victims were fleeing the conflict on their way to India.

To read in more detail please continue reading here: Continue reading

2 January 2013: Tribunal 2 Daily Summary – Alim, Kamaruzzaman

The Tribunal heard arguments in two matters:

1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Alim – Cross-examination of Prosecution Witness #8
2. Contempt Proceedings Against Suranjit Sengupta – a government minister

The cross-examination of Beauty Khanam, eighth prosecution witness in the case against Abdul Alim, was completed. The case wa then adjourned until January 15th. Out of court, Defense Counsel for Kamaruzzaman submitted an application for retrial to the Registrar.

Cross Examination of Prosecution Witness #8 Completed in the Case of Abdul Alim
Ahsanul Haq Hena and AEM Khalilur Rahman, Alim’s counsels, cross-examined Beauty, daughter of a martyr subeder major. She testified that the Shanti [Peace] Committee and members of the Razakars had acted upon Abdul Alim’s order and had killed her father in Joypurhat because he was fighting against the Pakistani army.

Beauty had already been cross-examined briefly on several other days, but not for long on each occasion. At one stage of yesterday’s cross-examination, the witness expressed discontent over Hena when he repeated the same questions he and his colleagues had asked her earlier.

The tribunal requested the Defence to decide among themselves who would ask what questions.

Contempt Proceedings Against Suranjit Sengupta
Upon his request, The tribunal then extended time  for Suranjit Sengupta, a minister without portfolio, until January 14 to explain his comments regarding the date verdicts in the cases pending with the tribunal could be expected.

On December 24, the tribunal on its own motion issued the show-cause notice on Suranjit following a report in a Bangla daily. Suranjit was quoted in the report as saying, “Verdict of 14 identified war criminals has already been finalised. Trial of these 14 war criminals would be completed anytime within 2013.”

Defense Counsel files Application for Retrial on behalf of Kamaruzzaman
The Defense filed an application on behalf of Accused Muhammad Kamaruzzaman for a retrial based on Skype and email communications between the former Chairman of Tribunal 1 and foreign legal expert Dr. Ahmed Ziauddin that allegedly show collusion between the prosecution and the judges as well as pressure from the executive branch of the government to provide verdicts before December 17 of last year.

The case against Kamaruzzaman is in ongoing and the Prosecution is presenting its case-in-chief. Fifteen prosecution witnesses have so far testified in the case against Kamaruzzaman. The Defense told the media that they are preparing  retrial petitions in the cases of the three other accused: Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed, Abdul Quader Mollah and Abdul Alim, all of which are pending in Tribunal 2. The Defense asserted that the Skype and email conversations show that the formal charges of the first eight cases pending with the two tribunals were prepared by Dr. Ahmed Ziauddin and his associates and came from Brussels.

The Defense told the media that they were not alleging any direct involvement in the controversy on the part of the judges of tribunal 2, however they claim that the appearance of bias prejudices their clients cases and so they see fit to file the petition.

The Defense cited the authority of the Tribunal under §46 (A) of ICT  rules of procedure to pass orders in the furtherance of “the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process.”