Evidence against Salauddin Quader Chowdhury vague

All the evidence brought by the prosecution against war crimes accused Salauddin Quader Chowdhury are vague, a defence lawyer claimed yesterday while placing arguments for the third day at International Crimes Tribunal-1.
Ahsanul Huq Hena also claimed that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses appeared "inconsistent" during the cross-examination. “All the evidences are as vague as a needle lost in the haystack," Ahsanul said, while arguing that the prosecution lacks enough evidence to prove the charges.
Referring to the arguments of prosecutor Tureen Afroz that mitigating circumstance will not apply in the "sentencing" of SQ Chowdhury, the defence counsel said the prosecution had guided the tribunal. "They can't do it," he said.
The defence yesterday spent all the day placing arguments over four prosecution witnesses' statements to the investigation officer which were taken as evidence under 19(2) of the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973.
The section reads, "A Tribunal may receive in evidence any statement recorded by a Magistrate or an Investigation Officer being a statement made by any person who, at the time of the trial, is dead or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which the Tribunal considers unreasonable."
Ahsanul argued that the section read "may" meaning that it was not mandatory for the tribunal to accept witnesses' statements as evidence.
He also said the provision could be used properly if the intention was good. If the intention is not good, the provision could be used purposefully, he added.
The tribunal accepted statements of Jotsna Bala Chowdhury, Janti Bala Pal, Badshah Mia and Badal Biswas to the IO as evidence, as three of them died and the fourth one left the country.
Jotsna was supposed to testify against SQ Chowdhury on the massacre at Jogotmollopara in Chittagong during the 1971 Liberation War.
Ahsanul said the prosecution brought their first witness on the charge seven months before Jotsna's death. Why did not they produce her for testimony before her death? he asked.
The defence lawyer questioned the necessity of taking Badsha's statement as evidence, as the witness did not mention SQ Chowdhury's name.
He also claimed that the investigation agency took statement from Janti Bala forcefully and they had evidence of it.
SQ Chowdhury, facing 23 war crimes charges, attended the tribunal yesterday.