Tag Archives: Investigation

5 August 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Qaisar Bail Application Granted

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Syed Mohammad Qaisar

Today Tribunal 2 granted bail to Mr Syed Mohammad Qaisar. This is only the second time either of the two Tribunals have granted bail to a suspect. Defendant Abdul Alim is also free on bail. All other suspects have been denied bail.

On 22 July 2013 the Tribunal had heard Qaisar’s bail application and instructed the jail authorities to submit a report on the availability of adequate health care facilities for the 73 year old war crimes suspect. Today the Tribunal announced that having reviewed the report it had reached the conclusion that the health of the detained suspect is such that he should be enlarged on bail, subject to strict adherence on his part to conditions imposed by the Tribunal. The following conditions apply to his bail:

  1. The suspect shall not communicate with any political leaders
  2. He shall refrain from making any comments to the media
  3. There shall be no form of intimidation of the potential witnesses of war crimes
  4. The suspect shall stay in his Banani residence and shall not go anywhere without prior permission of the tribunal
  5. He must cooperate with the investigation agencies
  6. A bail bond of Taka 1 Lac ( Taka 100,000) shall be submitted immediately on his behalf

The Tribunal warned that bail would be revoked if there was any violation of any of the conditions.

5 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

Today in the Salauddin Qader Chowdhury case the Defense continued presenting its Closing Arguments for the third day. The Tribunal then adjourned the proceedings of the case until 7 August 2013. Tomorrow, 6 August is a government holiday.

Statements under section 19(2)
The Defense argued that Section 19(2) of the ICT Act 1973 can be used arbitrarily due to its construction. Section 19(2) of the ICT Act 1973 states that the Tribunal may receive in evidence any statement recorded by a Magistrate or Investigation Officer being a statement made by any person who, at the time of the trial, is dead or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which the Tribunal considers unreasonable. The Defense argued that the word used in this section is ‘may’ which means this section is discretionary and there may be some exceptions. The section also used the words ‘any person’ and is not specific about the maker of the statement. The Defense remarked that where the statement is recorded by a Magistrate the statement is to be signed by the declarant and accompanied by a memorandum, similarly to Bangladesh’s Criminal Procedure Code. However, Section 19(2) allows for statement made to the Investigation Officer to be admitted into evidence, despite the fact that these statements are not signed by the declarant. The Defense argued that, under Bangladeshi law, statements made to the police, and therefore to the Investigation Officer, carry no value and should not be admitted into evidence.  The Defense therefore asserted that the open ended nature of Section 19(2) shows that there is scope for its misuse.   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

20 August 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Mueen Uddin and Khan PW 14, Alim Cross of Investigation Officer (PW 35).

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

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

Tribunal 2 recorded the testimony of Prosecution witness 14 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 of the witness was completed. The testimony of PW-14 does not support any specific charge but relates to the identity and background of Chowdhury Mueen Uddin who currently lives in the United Kingdom.

In the case against Abdul Alim the Defense resumed its cross-examination of the Investigation Officer and asked questions pertaining to the investigation procedure and authenticity of documentary evidence. Continue reading

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

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Motiur Rahman Nizami
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Salauddin Qader Chowdhury

Today in the Nizami case Prosecution witness 16 was scheduled to testify. However, the Prosecution failed to produce the witness and requested adjournment. The Tribunal allowed the request and fixed 11 August for recording the testimony of Prosecution witness 16.

In the case of Salauddin Qader Chowdhury, Defense counsel Ahsanul Huq Hena sought adjournment until Sunday, 4 August 2013, saying that he is sick. The Tribunal said that they cannot adjourn the case because of one Defense attorney’s illness when another Defense counsel is available in the same case. Thereafter, Ahsanul Huq Hena began the Defense’s Closing Arguments. Continue reading

30 July 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Khokon Pre-Trial, Chowdhury Prosecution Closing Arguments

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Pre-Trial Proceedings against Zahid Hossain Khokon
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Salauddin Qader Chowdhury

On 18 July the Tribunal took cognizance of the charges proposed against Zahid Hossain Khokon and issued a warrant for his arrest. Today the Tribunal passed an order under Rule 31 instructing the relevant authorities to publish notice of the warrant in the Daily Jonokontho and the Daily Star asking Zahid Hossain Khokon to appear before the Tribunal by 14 August 2013.

In the Salauddin Qader Chowdhury case the Prosecution made its Closing Arguments for the third consecutive day. The Prosecution presented their arguments on Charges 7, 8, 10, 11, 14 and 17. On 24 July the Tribunal passed an order allotting the 3 days to the Prosecution for their Closing Arguments, with an additional day allotted for the Prosecution’s reply to the Defense’s Closing Arguments. However the Prosecution had not completed their submissions by the end of today’s session and requested two additional days. The Tribunal granted them only one additional day, asking that they complete their presentation by tomorrow, 31 July 2013.  Continue reading

25 July 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Alim Prosecution Witness 35

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Abdul Alim

In the case against Abdul Alim. the Prosecution called the Investigation Officer, Mr ZM Altafur Rahman, as Prosecution witness 35. The Investigation Officer testified about his findings and stated that the accused played a central role in committing atrocities as the Chairman of Jaipurhat Peace Committee, which acted as an auxiliary force of the Pakistani Army.  He referred to documentary evidence collected during the investigation as being incriminating of Alim. These documents include several books that have been exhibited in addition to documents and newspapers seized by the Investigation Officer and enumerated on the Seizure List. Cross-examination was scheduled for a later date.

Demeanor of the Court
A junior member of the Defense informed the Tribunal that senior counsel Ahsanul Huq Hena, who has been cross-examining the witnesses, is ill. The Defense requested a long adjournment until Hena is able to fully recover. The Tribunal was critical of the request and noted that this sort of delay, on a regular basis, is tantamount to obstruction of justice. The Tribunal noted that there have been frequent requests for adjournment based on  either the illness of a Defense counsel or that of the Accused. They stated that such requests will not be entertained and that the Defense must complete the cross-examination between 29 July to 1 August 2013. The Judges stressed that the trial will continue at its pace without such delays, save in exceptional instances.