Tag Archives: Investigation

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.

25 July 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – ATM Azharul Islam Cognizance of Charges, Mir Qasem Ali Defense Applications

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 pre-trial proceedings against suspect ATM Azharul Islam the Prosecution submitted the Formal Charge before the Tribunal. The Tribunal passed an order taking cognizance of the Formal Charge and numbered the case as ICT BD Case No 5 of 2013. The Tribunal also directed the Prosecution to supply the Defense with all of the documents on which the Prosecution intends to rely, as well as the full list of proposed witnesses by the end of the day. They scheduled 18 August for hearing arguments regarding framing of the charges.

The Tribunal also heard an application filed by Alim’s Defense counsel requesting medically appropriate transportation of the suspect to and from the Tribunal. The Defense submitted that the ATM Azharul Islam suffers from back pain but is transported by prison van. The Prosecution objected saying that if such accommodation was made available to all it would create difficulties for the jail authorities due to the shortage of health friendly vehicles. The Tribunal passed an order directing the jail authority to provide ATM Azharul Islam health friendly vehicle if such vehicle is available to the prison authority.

In the pre-trial proceedings against suspect Mir Qasem Ali the Tribunal heard a Defense application seeking adjournment. The Defense submitted that they need privileged communication with their client Mir Qasem Ali. The Defense also requested legible copies of some Prosecution documents. The Tribunal rejected the request for adjournment but scheduled 28 July and 1 August from 10 am to 1 pm for privileged communication between the Defense and their client. They also directed the Prosecution to supply legible copies of the concerned documents if possible. They then heard the Prosecution’s submissions regarding the proposed charges against Ali.

The Prosecution submitted that until 6 November 1971, Mir Qasem Ali was the secretary of the Islami Chhatra Shangho Chittagong division. Between 6 November and 16 December 1971 they claimed that the Accused was also the general secretary of the Provincial Committee of the Islami Chhatra Shangho. They alleged that Mir Qasem was ‘Al-Badr high command.’ Most of the crimes allegedly committed under the leadership of Qasem Ali of took place at Dalim Hotel. The Prosecution briefly read out the 14 charges proposed against Mir Qasem Ali and stated that they had submitted the investigation report, a book titled ‘Muktijudder Potovumi’ vol- 1 and 2, witness statements, map of the place of occurrence, photos, and CDs in support of the charges. The charges are proposed under sections 3(2)(a), 3(2)(g), and 3(2)(h), indicating allegations of crimes against humanity; attempt, abetment or conspiracy; and complicity. The proposed charges are also framed indicating sections 4(1) and 4(2) as the relevant modes of liability, encompassing joint criminal liability and command responsibility respectively. Among the 14 charges proposed, charges 11 and 12 are for murder while the rest are for confinement, abduction, torture and other inhumane acts.

22 July 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Mobarak Hossain Adjournment, Nizami Cross-Examination of PW 14

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Moboarak Hossain
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Motiur Rahman Nizami

In the  Mobarak Hossain case the Tribunal was scheduled to hear the cross-examination of Prosecution Witness 6, Abdul Malek, who testified in support of charge 5. However, Hossain’s Defense counsel was absent when the item was called before the bench. After waiting half an hour the Tribunal stated that the Defense’s absence was unsatifisfactory. They passed an order scheduling the 28 July for the examination-in-chief of Prosecution Witness 7, instead of fixing a date for the cross-examination of Prosecution Witness 6, Abdul Malek.

In the Motiur Rahman Nizami case, the Defense completed the cross-examination of Prosecution witness 14, Abdus Salim Latif, who testified in support of charges 7 and 9. Thereafter, Tribunal adjourned the case until 24 July 2013. Continue reading →

4 August 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Khan and Mueen Uddin PW 9, Alim cross-examination of Investigation Officer

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

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

Tribunal 2 recorded the testimony of Prosecution witness 9 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 on this day. The testimony of Prosecution witness 9 supports Charge 11 against the accused, pertaining to the killing of physician Dr Alim Chowdhury.

The court also made some progress in the case against Abdul Alim as it continued to record the cross-examination of ZM Altafur Rahman, the Investigation Officer for the case. So far, the Defense counsel has directed their line of questioning at highlighting inconsistencies in the investigation procedures followed by the Investigation Officer. The Tribunal adjourned Alim’s case until 5th August, 2013. Continue reading →