Tag Archives: Nizami

13 Feb 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Gholam Azam Failure to Produce DW 2, Nizami Absence of Defense Counsel

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs Gholam Azam – examination of defense witness 2 (Accused not Present)
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs Motiur Rahman Nizami – inability of defense to attend due to violence (Accused Not Present)

The Tribunal was scheduled to hear the examination of Defense witness 2 in the Gholam Azam case. However, the Defense was unable to produce the witness and claimed that the witness had a fever and another witness had been detained in a separate case. The Defense requested adjournment.

The Tribunal was also scheduled to hear matters in the Nizami case. However, due to ongoing violence in Dhaka, senior Defense counsel Mizanul Islam was unable to reach the Tribunal. The Defense requested adjournment for the day.

Continue reading →

3 Feb 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary – Contempt Proceedings, Witness Testimony in Gholam Azam and Nizami

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Contempt Proceedings Against the Economist
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs Ghulam Azam – Defense witness 1 testimony (Accused not Present)
  3. Chief Prosecutor vs Motiur Rahman Nizami – Prosecution witness 2 (Accused Present)

On February 3, 2013 Mustafizur Rahman requested 4 weeks of adjournment on behalf of the Economist to reply to the 6 December 2012 Tribunal order in which the former Chairman of ICT-1 issued an order to show cause for contempt in relation to their reporting of alleged Skype and email conversations between the Chairman and foreign legal expert Ahmed Ziauddin. The Tribunal granted Mr. Rahman and the Economist a month and fixed the next date for hearing as 3 March 2013.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Gholam Azam
On February 3, 2013 Defense witness 1, Abdullahil Amaan Azmi, a former Army personnel and the son of accused Gholam Azam provided testimony. He introduced several documents as exhibits. He exhibited photocopies of reports published in the Don newspaper dated from February 12 to October 28, 1971 and photocopies of reports published in the Pakistan Observer dated from April 1 to July 29, 1971.

While Defense was exhibiting the newspapers Prosecution raised an objection regarding the context of the newspaper reports. The Tribunal however declined to consider the objection. The Prosecution then stated that they would file an application regarding their objection. The Defense witness then exhibited photocopies of two photos against the objection of the Prosecution. He also exhibited photocopies of Bangladesher Sadhinota Juddho Dolilpotro (published in June 1984 vol-10); Bangladesh Document 1971 (Part-3); Shanti Committee 1971 (Published in February 2012) a book written by Muntasir Mamun; and Judhoporad, Gonohottha and Bicharer Oneshon (published in May 2001) a book written by Dr M A Hasan. The Defense witness also exhibited a Office Memo No. 164(10)/con Dated May 25, 1971, regarding the appointment of the Razzakars. The Defense witness also exhibited a video clipping of a talk show ‘Shoja Kotha’ aired by Desh TV on May 14, 2012 and a video clipping of a program ‘Ronogoner Dinguli’ aired by BTV on April 20, 2012.

Abdullahil Amaan Azmi testified that the Language Movement started after 1947 and that between 1948 and 1954 Gholam Azam went to prison three times for his leadership in Language Movement. Azmi alleged that by eliminating Gholam Azam’s contribution from the history of Language Movement, the history of language Movement has been distorted. He further alleged that in a similar way over the last 41 years the history of Independence has been distorted and the involvement of Gholam Azam with the Liberation War has been repainted in a negative manner.

Azmi stated that in 1971 Gholam Azam was one of 130 members of the Peace Committee. But Azmi asserted that Gholam Azam was not of official status within the Peace Committee. He alleged that in the last 41 years no action has been brought against any of the official members of Peace Committee including the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Secretary and Joint Secretary, but nonetheless proceedings have been brought against the unofficial members of the Peace Committee for committing the alleged crimes. He claimed that the prosecution against Gholam Azam was brought only for political reasons and was designed to undermine him.

Thereafter, Prosecutor Haider Ali started to cross-examine Azmi. During the cross-examination he admitted that Moin E U Ahmed was the only Four Star General and that General Mostafizur Rahman was a honorary Four Star General.

The Tribunal then adjourned the case until Monday February 4, 2013

 Chief Prosecutor vs Motiur Rahman Nizami
In the Nizami case the Defense conducted cross-examination of prosecution witness 2, Zohiruddin Jalal alias Bishu Jalal, a former Freedom Fighter. During the cross-examination Zohiruddin Jalal admitted that it is possible to become a member of Muktijudha Songshod (an organization of freedom fighters) at any time. He admitted that he became the member of Muktijudha Songshod in 2005 and he could not remember his membership no. He stated said that former President Ershad first published a list of freedom fighters and then from 1991 to 1996 a voter list of freedom fighter was published. A freedom fighter’s list was also published by the Awami League. Jalal admitted that his name was not on the list of freedom fighters. He said that he applied to include his name in the voter list of Muktijudha Songsod as a member of Central Command Council in 1992. He said that he was the 35th member of Muktijudha Songsod. He admitted that those who are not a member of Muktijudha Songsod do not have a right to include their name in the voter list of Muktijudha Songsod.

Jalal said that he took admission in Westend School in 1970 in the 8th class. He could not continue his education into the 9th class in 1971 due to the Liberation War. He said that he passed SSC with second class in 1972 as a private student of Saleha School. He admitted that he could not remember the name of the subjects he took in SSC examinations. After that he took admission in Jogonnath College.

Jalal stated that during the Liberation War he used to read the Daily Purbo Desh but did not like to read the Shongram. He said that on August 29, 1971 he heard from someone that a report was published in Songram stating that some miscreants (Shongram used to describe freedom fighters as miscreants) were captured with arms and hearing this news he went to the Police Station with his uncle Bahauddin. He admitted that he saw 20 to 25 people there. He admitted that while testifying in Tribunal-2 he mistakenly said that he saw Rumi, Boudi, Jweal, Azhar, Chullu vai, Altaf Mahbub there (in the police station) due to the time gap of 41 years. He admitted that his first interview regarding Liberation War was published in the magazine of Westend School in 1972 or 1973. He admitted that his interviews were published in different newspapers including the Daily Prothom Alo and the Daily Jonokhontho, however, as far his knowledge none of his interviews were not published in Ittefaq, Azad or Purbo Desh. He said that he did not know whether his interview was published in any books or not. He said that he has given interviews to the Investigation Officer Razzak on two occasions. He stated that the commander of Bisshu Bahini was Shojib and he (Jalal) was given the title of Bisshu from Major Khaled Mosharrof, Commander of sector-2. He admitted that Razzakar of the Romna Police Station area was Gurha and that there was no Peace Committee in Savar.

21 January 2013: ICT 1 Daily Summary – Sayedee, Golam Azam, Nizami

The the verdict in the case of Chief Prosecutor vs. Kalam Azad was read out by the Chairman of ICT-2 in the ICT-1 room. Therefore Tribunal 1 did not convene until 12:30 and adjourned early at 1:30pm.

Today Tribunal 1 heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Delwar Hossain Sayedee: Resubmission of Defense Closing Arguments (Accused was Present)
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Golam Azam, Nizami, Sayedee: Order on application for review (Golam Azam and Nizami were not present)

Continue reading →

16 Jan 2013: ICT 1 Daily Summary – Sayedee and Golam Azam

NOTE TO THE READER: Today opposition parties called a hartal (strike) for half the day. AIJI’s researcher was unable to attend the proceedings because of the strike. (transport to and from court becomes quite dangerous during such strikes) These notes regarding the proceedings for today were compiled through other persons present at the tribunal including the Defense team and journalist coverage. The prosecution team was also asked to verify their accuracy but did not respond before publication The WCSC has done its best to insure the neutrality of the notes from today but cannot guarantee their accuracy. Please bring any discrepancies to our attention.

The Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Delwar Hossain Sayedee – Prosecution Closing Arguments
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Sayedee, Golam Azam, and Nizami – Hearing of Application for Review of Order Denying Retrial

Due to the half day hartal a junior member for the Defense requested adjournment until 2pm. The Tribunal granted his request and convened for the afternoon session.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Sayedee, Golam Azam, and Nizami
Yesterday, January 15, 2013 the hearing of the Review application began in the cases of Sayedee, Golam Azam and Nizami. Defense counsel Abdur Razzaq completed his arguments on behalf of the Accused.

Today Haider Ali gave a reply on behalf of the prosecution. He raised an objection regarding the Defense referring to the Order rejecting the retrial application as a ‘impugned order’ in their petition. He submitted that the Defense’s challenge of the usage of  the term ‘alleged’ in reference to the skype conversations between the former chairman and Ziauddin was also objectionable. He submitted that as the Defense introduced the skype and e-mail communications, the burden was on them to prove their contents. He argued that the existence of the conversations is established but not their content. Continue reading →

10 Jan 2013: ICT 1 Daily Summary

Today ICT 1 heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Contempt Proceedings – against Defense counsel Tajul Islam
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs Salauddin Quader Chowdhury – Prosecution Case-in-Chief
  3. Chief Prosecutor vs Motiur Rahman Nizami – Defense Case-in-Chief
  4. Chief Prosecutor vs Delwar Hossain Sayedee – Contempt Proceedings brought by Defense against ATN News and BTV
  5. Chief Prosecutor vs Golam Azam – Defense Case-in-Chief

None of the Accused were present in the courtroom today.

Contempt Proceedings
On October 22, 2012 the court began contempt proceedings against Defense Counsel Tajul Islam and  barred him from entering into ICT 1. The Tribunal had also served show-cause notices against Defense counsel Tanvir Ahmed Al-Amin and Mizanul Islam on November 6. On November 23, 2012 the former law minister and BNP leader, Moudud Ahmed, offered an unqualified apology on behalf of Tajul Islam and the other defense counsel and begged forgiveness of the court. On November 23, 2012 the Tribunal scheduled January 10 for passing its order on the matter and lifted the bar against Tajul Islam appearing in Tribunal 1, but still barred him from presenting submissions before the Tribunal. Today (January 10, 2013) Tribunal-1 rescheduled January 15, 2013 for passing the order.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Salauddin Qader Chowdhury
Today, Ahsanul Huq Hena, Defense counsel for Salauddin Qader Chowdhury sought adjournment and Tribunal allowed the prayer and adjourned the case till January 14, 2013.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Motiur Rahman Nizami
Mizanul Islam, Defense Counsel of Nizami sought adjournment for today (January 10, 2013) as Nizami was absent from the Tibunal. Mizanul Islam said before the Tribunal that yesterday (January 9, 2013) was fixed for Motiur Rahman Nizami’s case. Prosecutor Iqbal Hossain submitted that there was a common understanding that the case would continue even if Nizami was absent. The Tribunal adjourned the case until January 20, 2013.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Delwar Hossain Sayedee
Today was fixed for hearing proceedings filed by Defense Counsel of Delwar Hossain Sayedee against ATN News and BTV. Tanvir Ahmed Al-Amin submitted before the Tribunal that when Tribunal fixed the date for the resubmission of closing arguments ATN News broadcast interviews of the prosecution witnesses. The Defense alleged that in this programme Sayedee was described by the host as a criminal and war criminal, despite the fact that  Saydee has pled not guilty and has not been convicted of any crime up to this point.  Relying on section 11(4) of the ICT Act 1973, the Defense sought an order against the media agencies. The Defense argued that these programs prejudiced the Defense case.

Justice Jahangir Hossain interjected that the Tribunal will give judgment on the basis of the merits of the case alone and will not rely on any TV interview or program. The Defense further submitted that BTV also broadcast a similar program. In support of this application Defence submitted a CD and requested that the Tribunal watch the footage of the shows. The tribunal fixed January 14, 2013 for issuing an order.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Professor Golam Azam
Defense Counsel for Golam Azam also filed an application seeking the disqualification of Chief Prosecutor Zead-al-Malum. The Defense requested that the Tribunal hear this application along with a similar application being made in Salauddin Quader Chowdhury’s case. The Defense counsel for Chowdhury filed an application on December 19, 2012 for the removal of the Prosecutor Zead-al-Malum. These applications are based on references to Zead-al-Malum made in the Skype conversations between former Chairman Nizamul Hoque and foreign legal expert Ahmed Ziauddin. The Defense claims that these conversations show collusion between the Prosecution and the judges. The Tribunal fixed January 14, for the hearing of these applications.

Outside the Courtroom
Today, Chairman ATM Fazle Kabir returned from leave and was present at the Tribunal. At one point the Tribunal was informed that Sayedee was experiencing chest pains (He was present in the building but not in the courtroom). Defense Counsel sought the Tribunal’s permission for Sayedee to leave the Tribunal premises and return to custody. Tribunal granted the request.