Court orders trial of Hasina, Rehana, Selim

A Dhaka court yesterday framed charges against former premier Sheikh Hasina, her sister Sheikh Rehana and cousin Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim in a Tk 2.99 crore extortion case.
It also decided that trial of the case filed by businessman Azam J Chowdhury would begin Thursday.
This is the first time charges have been framed against a former prime minister.
Hasina, also president of Awami League (AL), however, protested her innocence and termed the case false and motivated.
Of the three, Hasina and former health minister Selim are detained while Rehana, who lives in London, was indicted in absentia.
Meeting her lawyers after the proceedings, Hasina demanded a national election by March-April.
Earlier, standing in the dock, she said, “False cases were filed against me after I had refused to strike a deal with the government. Another reason was I never want a military dictator to assume power and become the country's president.”
Addressing Judge Azizul Huq of Dhaka Metropolitan Session Judge's Court, she said she knows he is helpless as "he has to follow dictates from some special places".
"I know even if you move to ensure justice, you would be in trouble the following day,” she told the court adding, "I know I won't get justice here and so I look to Allah and the people of this country for justice."
Hasina made the comments when the judge asked her and Selim to say if they were guilty or not.
As both the accused kept making statements the judge said all he needed to know was if they plead guilty. He observed they would have plenty of scope to defend themselves once the trial begins.
Sitting at 9:30 in the morning, the court said the day's business would be confined to delivery of its orders on charge-framing.
“I find sufficient grounds to frame charges against all three accused,” the judge said in his ruling based on submissions by the defence and prosecution, Selim's judicial confession, evidence and documents produced by the prosecution.
The charges were brought under sections 384 and 385 read with section 34 of the penal code for extorting money, making threat of injury, and committing the extortion in connivance with one another.
If convicted, a person would be sentenced to three years' imprisonment or fined or both under section 384 while his/her sentence would be imprisonment not exceeding 14 years and less than five years, or fine or both under section 385.
Hasina and Selim were brought to the court minutes before the judge took his seat.
Dressed in a violet sari, the AL chief exchanged greetings with her party leaders and workers and others thronging the court set up on the Jatiya Sangsad Bhaban premises.
She said, “I have never asked for or received a single penny in bribe from anyone.
“The case is an attack on those who have survived the brutal killings on August 15, 1975."
She said she believes it was filed since they had failed to kill her also in the August 21 grenade attacks in 2004.
“It's all because they want to undermine the family members of the father of the nation. They know people are on my side and will vote for me if there's an election. How can I stand such false allegations against me,” said a visibly irritated Hasina.
“Had I been offered Tk 100 crore I would have turned that down,” she said referring to the charge that she had received Tk 1 crore from Selim at Gonobhaban. It was allegedly her share of the money extorted.
The complainant alleged that Selim gave Tk 1 crore to Rehana as well.
“I am daughter of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, why should I need to take Tk 1 crore extortion. None of our family has ever been involved in graft or bribery. There is no property in the name of my brothers--Jamal, Kamal and Russell,” said Hasina.
“If I had greed for money I could have made a lot when my father was a prime minister,” she continued.
Even the house at Dhanmondi where their parents had stayed has been kept in trust to provide stipend for the children, Hasina said.
Referring to her visit to America last April, she said the government, which sought to prevent her from returning to the country, was forced to lift the ban on her coming home as world opinion and the people of the country were in her favour.
"Even the advisers asked me not to return home, proposing that all cases against me would be withdrawn if I stayed abroad. The case was filed only because I did not want to stay abroad and wanted to return home," Hasina said, adding, "Later, cases were filed one after another. I do not even know who Azam J Chowdhury is."
Hasina said, "If I had any plan or did anything to take bribe or extort money by delaying work of power generation, then how was I able to reduce power crisis during that period?"
She asked the judge what could be the procedure to cancel the judicial statement taken "forcibly" from Selim.
In reply, the judge said, "I cannot do anything beyond rules."
Referring to article 35 of the constitution, she said the constitution has been violated by bringing the case under speedy trial. According to the article, a trial should be going in accordance with the existing law.
The former premier also raised questions over bringing the case under the Emergency Power Rules and objected to the setting up of the court on the Sangsad Bhaban premises.
Quoting the chief adviser saying recently that an accused would be tried under existing laws, Hasina said, "His speech is false. What he said is not happening in reality. This trial is being held like a camera trial, which is motivated and conspiratorial.
"Politicians are being undermined and the anti-graft drive is being conducted against them. Democracy has been in danger in the country many a time and military dictators have assumed power," she said.
Hasina mentioned that in the last four/five months she was not allowed to talk to anybody, not even her lawyers. "I was kept in total confinement," she said.
The judge told Hasina several times that elaborating the statement at this stage of the case is unnecessary and at one stage stopped Hasina from talking. Counsels of the AL chief then became excited and shouted for allowing her to speak. During the chaos a lawyer called the court "illegal".
Before Hasina started speaking, Selim maintained his innocence, saying the allegation against is not true.
He said, "The cheque produced as a piece of evidence of extorting money does not corroborate with the status of my bank account at that time.
"I did not receive any money. And the allegation that I shared the extorted money with Sheikh Hasina has no proof. Going to Gonobhaban means going through numerous checkpoints of different law enforcement agencies and areas with CCTVs. And no evidence that I went there with the money could be produced against me," Selim said.
Reading out from the constitution, he said, "No accused or offender can be forced to give statement but I have informed the court of the circumstances under which I gave the judicial statement and later retracted from that.
"I was threatened with cross-fire and electric shock, and was even tortured blindfolded to give the statement,” he said, telling that even the prosecution lawyer would also give such judicial statement against head of the state if they are put in similar circumstances.
"The statement given under section 164 must be withdrawn," he pointed out.
Hasina's chief counsel barrister Shafiq Ahmed filed a petition with the court seeking "enough" time before the trial begins. The court rejected the petition.
Syed Rezaur Rahman introduced himself as the counsel for Selim and told the court that his client is "aggrieved at the order and wishes to move to higher court". He appealed to the court to adjourn the trial for 21 days.
Chief Public Prosecutor ABM Sharfuddin Khan Mukul opposed Shafiq Ahmed's prayer and sought fixing of the date for taking deposition of the witnesses.
The court fixed January 17 to begin the trial.