19/03/2013 16:05 19/03/2013 16:00
The verdict of Saydee, the most familiar and popular preacher of Islam in Bangladesh, has already given by a local tribunal named International crime tribunal. This entirely criticized tribunal’s verdict finally resulted in a mass protest against the Bangladesh government throughout the country. To stop the countrywide protest Bangladesh government went to the toughest line, as a result openly shooting at public and arresting indiscriminately has taken place. The police force of Bangladesh is also criticized for behaving as a political force of the ruling party, Bangladesh Awami league. The recent recruitment in the police also were claimed to be biased by mentioning that Pro-Awami supporters and activists were only been recruited in several posts at largest portion. If that allegation against the recruitment in police force is true in any significant level then the recent mass killing by police is not a surprise at all.
While the tribunal was hearing the cases against Saydee none of the national newspapers and TV medias released the detailed news clearly. Only The DailyShangram which is controlled by Jamat-e-Islami, Nayadiganta owned by a Jamat leader and Daily Amartdesh published almost every hearing in greater details so that people can be informed about the real scenario about what was going on inside the court. But surprisingly the leading media avoided such a high profile matter to cover in detail which generates a suspicious question that why they did not do so? As a national issue it has a very significant level of importance in its nature but was merely covered in the prominent news Medias with shortly summarized news. That is why most of the people were not informed that how partialities by judges had taken place. Not only that, few newspapers and journalists were also harassed by the government intervention through several ways. Some of the journalists were also warned by the tribunal and some were threatened by many sources. This observation actually created a big question about the fairness and justness of the tribunal as well as the intention of the government.
In 29st march of 2010 a case was filed against Saydee accusing him for desecrate religious sentiment. In a gathering of Jamat e Islami on 21st of Jun of the same year, a leader named Rafiqul Islam khan said mentioning the government’s oppression towards the leaders the party that such oppression were also done to the prophets of Islam and their companions. This particular statement were taken by the opportunists as a so-called “comparison” of Jamat leaders with Prophet (SA) and his companions hence hurting the religious feeling of Muslims as they claim. As the illogicality of the case is clearly visible the very first attempt of Saydee’s arrest were seriously biased and politically motivated. As the case on which ground he was arrested was entirely void the government filed another few cases relating him with the war crime during the liberation war of 1971.
As the time elapsed, the entire tribunal including every single body related with the judgment process were started being criticized seriously with several ethical and moral angles of justice. The hearing against Saydee began on 7th December in 2011, and it ended in August of 2012. In this nine months of longest time were given to the plaintiff which is actually the government itself. Such long time was given to the lawyers of government to manage witnesses and bring them in court for hearing, by this time they were managed to present 28 witnesses but they were also failed to present their many witnesses on court.
Here are some dates are mentioned below when the plaintiff failed to bring their witness.
On 7th February 2012 the plaintiff’s lawyers failed to bring 24th witness that is why the trial was postponed
On 13th February again the plaintiff’s lawyers failed to bring the 24th witness, and then the trial was postponed until 16th February.
On 22nd February the plaintiff’s lawyers failed to bring the 28th witness, the cause were told that the witness named Afroza Begum was sick, then the trial was postponed.
- On 23rd February 2012 the plaintiff failed to bring their witness that is why the trail were postponed
On 7th march 2012 the plaintiff again faild to bring their witness and this time in the 5th time of failing to bringing witness the rule were held that the plaintiff is given the last chance which obviously means that the further failure of bringing witness to the court will not be accepted.
However on 18th march the plaintiff again failed to bring their witness and they finally said that they do not have anymore witness to bring whereas according to their list of witnesses submitted earlier many more witnesses were still remain to bring to the court. On 20th march 2012 an written letter were formally submitted mentioning the plaintiff is unable to bring the remaining witness that they listed before.
- Later on the witnesses whom the plaintiff failed to bring in the court, the so called testimonies were taken as witness without hearing a single word from them and eventually there was no chance to ask them a single question to verify their testimonies yet those were considered as valuable witness by the court.
This way from the january 2012 the goverment which is the plaintiff in this case faild to bring their witnesses at least 17 times and they were only warned by the court once in their 5th time of being failed to bring witness. During the hearing, the government breached the serial several times and brought other witness instead of the ones they were supposed to bring.
However, as long as the justice and equal treatment towards both parties in the trial is concern, we have seen partiality and biasness of the judges which was severely visible even by the people in general. For example in terms of bringing the witness the tribunal behaved differently between plaintiff and defendant.
The hearing in favor of Saydee began on 2nd September 2012. In this case they were given only one month and five days to prepare the entire procedures whereas government side was given more than nine months. However during that shortest period of time the lawyers of Saydee, the defendant brought nine witnesses on behalf of Saydee but they managed to bring one witness per day only. Provided that they were given very short time to get prepared and manage all legal aspects, this was quite obvious. In this junction, the tribunal held a rule against the defendant’s lawyers mentioning that if they further fail to bring more than one witness then the hearing will be shut down. In the next date of hearing the defendant was again failed to bring more than one witness and as a consequence the tribunal held the same rule against the defendant. The disparity from judges and tribunal were this much necked where the plaintiff were given nine months long time yet they were not strictly warned even though they failed to bring witnesses 17 times whereas the defendant were strictly warned simply due to not bringing more than one witness per day.
In the entire time of hearing the defendant were failed to bring witness 6 times on different dates inconsecutively. In the entire time of hearing the defendant were failed to bring witness 6 times on different dates inconsecutively whereas the plaintiff which is government failed 17 times.
After observing such disparity one without any academic education on legal terms would also be able to say that this entire trail is questionable and void. But then these are very few discriminations amongst all. There are many more to be mentioned.
14040 views 1 comments International Crime Tribunal ICT Saydee Jamat Bangladesh War Crime Trubunal The verdict of Saydee