Try war criminals, ensure justice
The trial of war crimes must be held to ensure justice, but politics should be kept at bay, observed Ian Martin, a former secretary general of Amnesty International and a witness to the beginning of Bangladesh's War of Independence on March 26, 1971. A day before the 40th Independence Day today, Martin told The Daily Star, "I don't believe there is a time limit [for trying war criminals, as forty years have past since the war crimes were committed]." Being a champion campaigner for human rights, he could not help but get frustrated about the way for decades the world outside cared so little about addressing the crimes of 1971, or actively opposed it. "[The trial is important] for the fundamental reason that impunity for the crimes in the past still leaves victims quite properly aggrieved, and ultimately undermines the rule of law for future." "Criminals of the Second World War went on being sought after, and being prosecuted around the world. So, I certainly believe that there should still be a degree of justice possible for the crimes of 1971," said Martin. He, however, rooted for a genuinely impartial and non-politicised process of justice. "I think having set up the tribunal, it is no longer a matter for the government, and the government and politicians should stand away from the process, and ensure that it operates without being subject to political pressures of one direction or another," suggested Martin, adding that the government's attitude to trying these crimes will also be judged by others abroad. In 1971, he was working for the Ford Foundation in East Pakistan, and unlike many in the world of non-governmental human rights and transitional justice organisations of today, he had a fair knowledge of the mind-boggling crimes against humanity and genocide that were being carried out starting from the night of March 25. He strongly believes that the 1972 report of the International Commission of Jurists was right to conclude that there was a strong case not only that the Pakistan army and its collaborators had committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, but that acts of genocide had been perpetrated against the Hindus. "Few of the human rights organisations working internationally today, existed in 1971," Martin cited it as one of the reasons why the genocide in Bangladesh has not been featuring prominently in the world's concerns. The Bangladesh government often seeks help from foreign governments for evidence on war crimes of 1971. He is not sure if the evidence are in their possession. But if they have those evidence, those should be made available, he said. On that night of March 25, Martin, along with his colleagues stood on the roof of a guest house in Gulshan, listening with helpless horror to the automatic weapons fire and explosions of shells, watching the evidence of attack in the sky, which they realised was targeting Dhaka University, EPR (East Pakistan Rifles) in Pilkhana, and Rajarbagh Police Line. Close by them, troops sent to arrest an elected Awami League leader, gratuitously murdered the staff in the house, finding him gone. When the curfew was lifted by the Pakistani army after the massacre, Martin drove around the city. He found the famous Kali Temple in the middle of Race Course totally obliterated, and gradually came to know about the extent of killings that had gone on the university campus. "Notes of my days in Dhaka in March 1971 were taken from me when I was searched by Pakistan security before boarding a flight back to Islamabad," said Martin. Months later, he however managed to visit refugee camps in West Bengal and friends in Mujibnagar, where the Bangladesh government in exile was situated after the declaration of independence. The revered British -- who returned to Bangladesh in 1988 heading the first human rights mission to Chittagong Hill Tracts as well as to press Amnesty's other concerns with the military dictator HM Ershad's regime -- arrived in Dhaka this time at the invitation of the Liberation War Museum to its 15th founding anniversary celebration. He was found quite moved by the intense desire of the people to see the trial of war crimes held. But, one of the most challenging tasks for the state is to gather acceptable enough evidence to try the war criminals of 1971 after forty years. Martin thinks plenty of evidence will come into light through the series of trials of war criminals, but those evidence cannot produce a complete picture of what occurred in 1971. "The only evidence will come into court is the evidence that was brought into court against particular individuals. So if Bangladesh wants, if the society wants a full picture of the period of major human rights crimes, then it would not achieve that through a limited or even the largest possible number of individual criminal prosecution," observes Martin. He suggested, "That is why many countries have set up truth commissions which are charged with creating such a full picture, and which can examine what occurred without necessarily having evidence of who the individual perpetrators were." "I feel that there is perhaps a case for a broader examination of what occurred in 1971. But again that is a matter for people to debate here, and their interest in debating it. With considerable international experience, I refer to the experience of East Timor, which I know particularly well, on how a truth commission can build up a very full and credible picture of a mass human rights violation," said Martin, who worked in East Timor on crimes against humanity committed there. From his experience of working in East Timor, Martin sees a similar problem in Bangladesh. "One problem is that the most of the major perpetrators were Pakistani army officers who are beyond the reach now of any proceedings in Bangladesh. That is a context I am very familiar with because I worked in East Timor where crimes against humanity in my opinion were committed by the Indonesian army and the local militia," said Martin. "In the end of the day it was only the local militia, who were nationals, could be prosecuted because the Indonesian military officials were effectively protected in Indonesia. So that limits what can be achieved. But I still think it's right, and there should be a process of justice," he observed. "I think in principle, where there have been war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide -- the worst perpetrators should be prosecuted whoever they are irrespective of nationality. But if that's not possible, I still think major perpetrators should be prosecuted even if it is not possible to achieve that in all cases," Martin replied to a question regarding whether he sees any problem in trying Bangladeshi war criminals without trying the Pakistani perpetrators. About the possible role of International Criminal Court (ICC) in this case, Martin said ICC cannot clearly play any role in trying the war criminals of 1971, because ICC cannot have jurisdiction on anything that occurred before the treaty in Rome in 2002. So there is no way ICC can be involved in trying the crimes of 1971. He said, "I think international human rights organisations have a strong general position that there should be justice for major crimes, whenever they have occurred. Of course they will then go on to be concerned that justice is done according to international standards, and due process." "So they would scrutinise the proceedings according to how fair they are, and the legal frameworks being practiced, and that is right too. But I think they should start from the fact that there should never be impunities for major crimes," he continued. Bangladesh's move to try its local war criminals of 1971 has drawn special attention across the globe as the country is going to try the accused under a domestic law that was passed by its own legislature in 1973. Regarding the law Martin said, "There are still some concerns, I know, amongst lawyers working for human rights organisations, transitional justice organisations regarding the legal framework even after the amendments that the governments introduced in the 1973 Act." "But I think there is also still some openness in the part of the tribunal to ensure that its regulations -- if they need any further amendments -- can take those concerns into account." There is a provision of capital punishment in the International Crimes Tribunal Act 1973. But as a human rights activist and a former secretary general of Amnesty International, Martin is not only personally opposed to death penalty under all circumstances, he also campaigned against death penalty in countries like the United States and Iran. "I would like to see Bangladesh abolish the death penalty for any offence. I think that would be a real progress. But of course I recognise, as long as the death penalty is there for the worse of ordinary criminal offences -- murder and etc. -- it's going to be hard to argue that it's wrong to include it for terrible crimes of 1971," said Martin. "But I certainly hope that there will in the end be no execution, in the end of this process, because I believe there has been too much killings in Bangladesh over the years, and I think that is a cycle that needs to come to an end, and I hope one day Bangladesh as a society will decide that it wants to get rid of death penalty in all cases," said Martin.
Comments