Reasons for long delay
The international crimes tribunal was guided by the constitution, laws and evidence and did not compromise with any person or organisation, said the Tribunal-1 chief in his introductory comments before delivering yesterday's verdict.
"We do not compromise or have any understanding. We are not guided by anyone. We compromise with only incident, evidence, law and the constitution," said Justice M Enayetur Rahim while responding to speculations about delays in delivering the judgement in the case against Jamaat-e-Islami Ameer Motiur Rahman Nizami.
Nizami and his party colleague Abdul Quader Mollah both were indicted on May 28, 2012 in separate war crimes cases. Although Mollah was executed on December 12 last year after the Appellate Division had disposed of his case, Nizami's case faced a long delay.
The case took around 29 months, the longest from indictment to the verdict, due to changes of prosecutors, alleged delaying strategy of the defence, the Chittagong arms haul case, in which Nizami was one of the accused, reconstitution of the Tribunal-1, and the convict's "illness" on the day scheduled earlier for verdict.
Tribunal-1 Chairman Justice M Enayetur Rahim said everybody had been waiting for the verdict for a long time and so was the tribunal.
Questions were raised by different quarters and the media for the long delay, he said.
"As a judge, there is no scope to take these [remarks] into cognisance or make any response. And it should not be proper to respond to the remarks.
"We would like to say one thing: no-one should be condemned unheard for the sake of justice and the rule of law," he added.
Justice Enayetur added: "We cannot go to streets or take part in talk shows. We cannot give speeches or issue statements. Please remember these before making any comment on the court or judge."
He said they sat mutely and those, who made such comments, should have remembered that.
By pronouncing the judgement yesterday, the Tribunal-1 has concluded nine cases of the first spell that began in 2011-12.
The war crimes trial of Nizami was bogged down owing mainly to his being an accused in the sensational 10-truck arms haul case of 2004. The government had to send him to Chittagong generally twice a month so that he could appear before a court there.
The tribunal, in an extraordinary move, overcame this barrier with an order that Nizami should not be produced in the Chittagong court, which also sentenced him to death this year, if proceedings of the two cases coincided.
Besides, change of the conducting prosecutor twice, poor preparatory work by the prosecution, their failure to produce witnesses, an array of time petitions from the defence and absence of senior counsels on scheduled dates also caused further delays.
Against the backdrop of continuous failure of the defence to appear before the court, the tribunal on November 13 drew a conclusion to the case. The tribunal, however, gave the defence an opportunity later to place their arguments. The case finally ended on November 20.
Altab Uddin Ahmed, conducting prosecutor of the case, was replaced by Mir Iqbal Hossain last year. Iqbal was replaced by Mohammad Ali on May 12 after a prosecution witness turned hostile.
Progress in the case had stalled for a couple of weeks in December 2012 in the wake of the "Skype scandal". The defence had filed petitions for a retrial, but it was rejected on January 3, 2013.
Nizami was arrested on June 29, 2010 in a case filed in connection with hurting religious sentiments of the Muslims. He was shown arrested in the war crimes case on August 2 the same year.
Investigators submitted a 411-page probe report on Nizami in October 2011. On December 11 the same year, the prosecution pressed charges against him, Jamaat's Secretary General Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed and Assistant Secretary General Muhammad Kamaruzzaman before the tribunal.
The tribunal on January 9 accepted formal charges against Nizami and indicted him on May 28, 2012.
The prosecution produced its first witness on August 26, 2012 and examined 26 witnesses, including the investigation officer of the case. The defence completed cross-examining the IO on October 7.
The defence had four witnesses to testify for Nizami and their testimony ended on October 31, 2013.
The prosecution took four days to place their arguments and rebut the arguments of the defence. The defence commenced their arguments on November 7 but skipped the next week on grounds of "personal difficulties" of lawyers.
Discontented with the absence of the defence, the tribunal closed the case on November 13. However, the court later allowed the defence to place arguments for three days from November 17.
The prosecution gave their rebuttal on November 20.
The then chairman of the tribunal Justice ATM Fazle Kabir has meanwhile gone on retirement in January this year without delivering the verdict. The tribunal was reconstituted on February 23 with a new chairman, Justice M Enayetur Rahim, who decided to hear the arguments again.
Arguments by both the prosecution and the defence went on between March 10 and March 24 until the tribunal concluded the proceedings.
The tribunal on June 23 fixed the following day for delivering the verdict but could not do that as the jail authorities did not produce Nizami before the tribunal citing his "sickness" that frustrated thousands of justice seekers.
Comments