Tag Archives: complicity

Special Report: Chief Prosecutor vs. Gholam Azam Verdict and Legal Findings

This special report provides a detailed overview of the factual and legal findings of the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) Judgment in Chief Prosecutor vs. Professor Gholam Azam. Gholam Azam was found guilty on all five charges and sentenced to 90 years imprisonment. The Tribunal made a point of noting that he deserved the death penalty, but because of his age and illness, they saw fit to sentence him to life imprisonment instead. Arguments in the case were completed on 17 April 2013 and the verdict was issued on 15 July 2013. It was the second verdict to be issued by Tribunal 1, and the fifth verdict issued by the ICT. Our previous special report on the Gholam Azam case reported in detail on the documentary and testimonial evidence used to support each count within each distinct charge against the Defendant, as well as the general arguments made by both parties. This report focuses on the legal outcomes of the case.

The full report is available here:Special Issue No. 5 – Gholam Azam Case Verdict

29 August 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Qasem Ali Pre-Trial, Azharul Islam Pre-Trial, Nizami PW 18

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Pre-trial Proceedings against Mir Qasem Ali
  2. Pre-trial Proceedings against Azharul Islam
  3. Chief Prosecutor vs. Motiur Rahman Nizami

In the case of Mir Qasem Ali the Tribunal was scheduled to issue its order on the Charge Framing of the case. However, the Defense previously requested additional time so that senior Defense counsel Abdur Razzak could attend. The Defense previously submitted a petition requesting that the order be scheduled for after 8 September so that senior Defense counsel Abdur Razzaq could be present to argue for the discharge of the case. The Prosecution opposed the application saying that law does not permit such a long adjournment. The Tribunal then passed an order scheduling its Charge Framing Order for 5 September 2013. In the meantime they stated that if Defense counsel Abdur Razzaq wished to appear before the Tribunal it would allow him to submit arguments in favor of discharging the case.

In the case of ATM Azharul Islam the Prosecution began their arguments on the framing of charges. The Prosecution read out the historical background of the case, claiming that in 1971 ATM Azharul Islam was a student of HSC at Karmicle College, the Rangpur unit President of Islami Chhatra Shangho, and the Al-Badr Commander of Rangpur district unit. The Prosecution has proposed 6 charges against ATM Azharul. After hearing these opening arguments the Tribunal adjourned the proceedings of the case until 3 September as the Defense submitted an application for adjournment at the beginning of today’s session.

In the case of Motiur Rahman Nizami the Tribunal recorded the testimony of Prosecution witness 18, Zahurul Haque. They then adjourned the proceedings of the case until 1 September 2013.  Continue reading

19 August 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Investigation of Abdus Sobhan, Nizami PW 16

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Investigation of Abdus Sobhan
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Motiur Rahman Nizami

Today in the pre-trial proceedings against Abdus Sobhan the Tribunal was scheduled to receive either a progress report of the investigation of the Prosecution’s proposed Formal Charge against the suspect. The Prosecution submitted a progress report. They also filed an application requesting permission to interrogate the suspect in the safe home. The Tribunal set 22 August 2013 for arguments on this application.

In the case of Motiur Rahman Nizami, the Tribunal recorded the testimony of Md Jane Alam, alias Janu, Prosecution witness 16. He testified in support of Charge no 7. The Defense conducted its cross-examination. The Tribunal then adjourned the proceedings of the case until 25 August 2013.  Continue reading

18 August 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – ATM Azharul Islam and Mir Qasem Ali Pre-Trial Proceedings

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Pre-trial proceedings against ATM Azharul Islam
  2. Pre-trial proceedings against Mir Qasem Ali 

Today in the pre-trial proceedings against ATM Azharul Islam the Tribunal was scheduled to hear arguments regarding the framing of charges against the Defendant. However, the Defense filed two applications: one for adjournment and another requesting privileged communication with the Defendant. The Defense argued that they received numerous documents from the Prosecution and had not had sufficient time to examine them. Additionally they argued they needed additional time to prepare for the hearing on the charge matter and to consult with their client. The Prosecution opposed the applications, arguing that privileged communication is not appropriate at this stage of trial. After hearing both sides the Tribunal granted both applications and set 24 August for privileged communication between ATM Azharul Islam and his two defense attorneys from 10 am to 1 pm. The Proceedings were then adjourned until 29 August 2013.

The Tribunal then turned to pre-trial proceedings against Mir Qasem Ali in which it heard the Defense’s arguments for dismissal of the proposed formal charges against the Defendant. Continue reading

25 August 2013: ICT -1 Daily Summary: Nizami PW 17

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Motiur Rahman Nizami

Today the Tribunal recorded the testimony of Jamal Uddin, Prosecution witness 17, in the case against Motiur Rahman Nizami. Jamal Uddin testified in support of Charges 2, 4 and 6. The Defense Counsel began its cross-examination of the witness but did not complete it before the close of the day’s session.

Prosecution witness 17, Jamal Uddin, testified in support of charges 2, 4 and 6. Charge 2 alleges that Motiur Rahman Nizami conspired to commit crimes under section 3(2)(g) of the ICT Act 1973, resulting in murder, rape and deportation of victims as Crimes Against Humanity. He is accused of being liable as a party to a joint criminal enterprise under section 4(1), and due to his superior responsibility under section 4(2) of the Act. Under Charge 4 the Prosecution alleges that Motiur Rahman Nizami conspired to commit crimes under section 3(2)(g) of the ICT Act and was complicit in murder, rape, looting and destruction of properties as crimes against humanity in the village Karamja, He is therefore charged under section 3(2)(a), 3(2)(h), and 3(2)(g). The charges cite both section  4(1) and 4(2) as the relevant modes of liability. Charge 6 alleges that Motiur Rahman Nizami raided the homes of Dr. Abdul Awal and others in Dhulaura. Having detained a number of persons it is alleged that Nizami was involved in first handing over at least 30 persons to the Pakistani army to be killed and later killing an additionally 22 persons who initially escaped. He is charged under section 3(2)(a), with liability specified under sections 4(1) and 4(2).

Continue reading

14 August 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Chowdhury Closing Arguments, Prosecution Rebuttal

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Salauddin Qader Chowdhury

The Tribunal heard the seventh day of the Defense’s Closing Arguments in the Salauddin Qader Chowdhury case. The Tribunal had instructed the Defense yesterday that they needed to conclude their arguments within the first hour of today’s session. After the Defense completed their arguments the Prosecution presented its rebuttal. The Tribunal then closed the case pending judgment.  Continue reading

4 August 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Chowdhury Defense Closing Arguments

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Salauddin Qader Chowdhury

In the Salauddin Qader Chowdhury case Defense counsel Ahsanul Huq Hena presented the second day of their Closing Arguments.

The Defense argued there is no link between Salauddin Qader Chowdhury and any political party or auxiliary force that was involved in atrocities during the 1971 war. The Defense referred to the testimony of the Investigation Officer who asserted that Fazlul Qader Chowdhury, father of Salauddin Qader Chowdhury, was the associate of the ruling party of Pakistan and that Fazlul supported the Pakistani occupation forces and assisted them and directly or indirectly committed crimes with his followers. The Investigation Officer additionally claimed that Salauddin Qader Chowdhury was inspired by his father’s political ideology and with the help of Pakistani occupation forces he and his followers also directly or indirectly committed mass killings and Crimes Against Humanity in Chittagong. The Defense argued that one cannot assume that sons always follow the ideology of their fathers. They argued that the Investigation Officer failed to present evidence in support of his claims. There is no document to show that Salauddin Qader Chowdhury followed the political ideology of his father or participated in the election campaign of his father. Continue reading