Tag Archives: Chowdhury Mueen Uddin

27 August 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Alim DW 1, Khan & Mueen Uddin PW 18

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

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

Today in the Alim case Tribunal 2 recorded the testimony of Defense witness 1. Defense counsel Ahsanul Haque Hena conducted the examination-in-chief in the morning session while Prosecutor Rana Das Gupta conducted cross-examination of the defense witness during the second half of the day.

Additionally, the Tribunal recorded the testimony of Prosecution witness 18 in the case against Ashrafuzzaman Khan and Chowdhury Mueen Uddin, both of whom are being tried in absentia. Both the examination-in-chief and cross-examination were completed. The testimony of Prosecution witness 18 supports Charge 6, regarding the abduction and murder of Dr Abul Khayer and other intellectuals.

Continue reading →

25 August 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Khan & Mueen Uddin PW 17

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ashrafuzzaman Khan and Chowdhury Mueen Uddin

Today Tribunal 2 recorded the testimony of Prosecution witness 17 in the case against Ashrafuzzaman Khan and Chowdhury Mueen Uddin, both of whom are being tried in absentia. The testimony of the witness is relevant to the background identification of Ashrafuzzaman Khan.  Continue reading →

14 August 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Khan and Mueen Uddin PW 12

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ashrafuzzaman Khan and Chowdhury Mueen Uddin – in absentia

Today Tribunal 2 recorded the testimony of Prosecution witness 12, Mr Anirban Mostafa, the son of martyred journalist ANM Golam Mostafa. The witness testified regarding Charge 3. The Prosecution asserted that his testimony corroborates that of his uncle ANM Golam Rahman Dulu, who testified as Prosecution witness 8 on 31 July 2013.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Khan and Mueen Uddin
The witness testified that he is the son of victim ANM Golam Mostafa ,who was killed in the massacre of Bangladesh’s intellectual community on 15 December 1971.  He stated that he was only a few months old in 1971. He learned about his father’s abduction from his mother, his uncles, and newspaper reports.    Continue reading →

13 August 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Hartal Coverage of Khan and Mueen Uddin PW 10

Today a nation-wide hartal was called in response to the revocation of Jamaat’s registration as a political party on 2 August 2013. Jamaat postponed the hartal in order to allow people time to return home from Eid related travels. Today’s coverage is therefore gathered from media sources and from conversations with the Prosecution and the Defense teams.

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Ashrafuzzaman Khan and Chowdhury Mueen Uddin – in absentia

Tribunal 2 recorded the testimony of Prosecution witness 10 Mr Iftekhar Haider Chowdhury, a nephew of martyred intellectual Professor Mofazzal Haider Chowdhury. The witness gave testimony in support of Charge-7.  Continue reading →

22 August 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Khan & Mueen Uddin PW 16, Alim Cross-Examination of PW 35

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

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

In the case against Ashrafuzzaman Khan and Chowdhury Mueen Uddin, who are being jointly tried in absentia, the Tribunal heard the testimony of Prosecution witness 16. Both the examination-in-chief and cross-examination were completed today. The testimony of Prosecution witness 16 supports Charge 6, which alleges that they were responsible for the abduction and killing of Professor Gias Uddin Ahmed, among other intellectuals.

In the case against Abdul Alim the Defenst resumed its cross-examination of the Investigation Officer, Prosecution witness 35. The Defense’s questioning focused on the investigation procedure followed by the Officer and the authenticity of various documents submitted into evidence.  Continue reading →