Prosecution witness declared hostile

The prosecution in the war crimes case against Jamaat-e-Islami chief Motiur Rahman Nizami declared its witness hostile during his deposition before the International Crimes Tribunal-1 yesterday.
This is the first time the prosecution declared its witness hostile at the tribunals.
Declaring witness Prodip Kumar Dev hostile, prosecutor Mir Iqbal Hossain through cross-examination tried to get him to say how Nizami was involved in alleged atrocities. The witness remained tight-lipped.
It also became apparent during yesterday's proceedings that the prosecutor concerned was not properly prepared.
Seventh witness Prodip yesterday in his deposition said he lived in Karamja village in Sathia of Pabna during the Liberation War in 1971.
He said on May 8, 1971, he climbed a litchi tree belonging to Megha Thakur to harvest. “Moments later, the Pakistani army raided the house. I was on that tree at the time,” Prodip said.
The Pakistani army took 10 people beside a temple near the house and beat them up. Later, all of them were lined up before they were shot, he said.
Nine of them, Megha Thakur, Dwizu Thakur, Korun Thakur, Shoshthi Haldar, Shanti Haldar, Adu Haldar, Kartik Haldar, Suresh Haldar and Prodip's uncle Murali Chandra, were killed. Tara Haldar was also in the group but managed to survive.
Prodip, who fled the scene after the killings, also said he saw Shukur, Afzal and Moslem at the spot.
Prodip said about 12-14 days before the killing, a meeting was held at Khodabaksh Chairman's board office during which a call was made to the villagers not to leave the country.
“That's all,” Prodip said concluding his testimony.
Prosecutor Iqbal asked the witness whether he gave a statement before the investigation officer of the case.
The witness said he could not remember.
Iqbal went back to his chair and a couple of minutes later he stood before the tribunal and declared the witness “hostile” and sought permission to cross-examine him.
The three-member tribunal, led by Justice ATM Fazle Kabir, allowed the cross-examination but asked the prosecution to submit a written prayer in this regard.
Iqbal again asked Prodip if he had given a statement before the investigation officer Abdur Razzaq on November 6, 2010.
“I cannot remember,” the witness said.
Iqbal suggested that the witness mentioned in his statement before the investigation officer that Motiur Rahman Nizami and Al-Badr commander Rafiqun Nobi were involved in the May 8 1971 incident.
This led to the tribunal stepping in since the witness' statement before the investigation officer did not mention Nizami involved in the May 8, 1971 incident. Tribunal judge Justice Jahangir Hossain Selim said, “Can you take anything beyond the statement? It is not mentioned in the statement.”
The prosecutor then began going through the statement.
Justice Selim said, “You [Iqbal] are a senior lawyer. It seems you have not gone through the statement.”
Iqbal then asked another question to the witness which did not seem proper to the tribunal. “How could we make you understand? This is not the way of cross-examination,” said Tribunal-1 chief Justice Kabir.
The tribunal then lectured the prosecutor on questioning methods of hostile witnesses.
Iqbal then made a suggestion that the witness received financial benefits from the accused and covered up the truth.
“I did not see Motiur Rahman Nizami,” Prodip again said.
“You have given a false testimony,” the prosecutor suggested.
But the suggestion confused the tribunal. Justice Selim said, “Do you [Iqbal] want to say his entire testimony is false?”
“No, No, My lord,” Iqbal replied instantly.
The same tribunal two months ago suggested that Iqbal examines witnesses before producing them to the court. The tribunal made the suggestion as the tribunal faced difficulties in recording deposition of third prosecution witness on March 19.
Yesterday, the defence declined to cross-examine prosecution witness Prodip.
The proceeding of the case was adjourned until May 19.
MOJAHEED
The prosecution yesterday continued placing their closing arguments in the war crimes case against Jamaat-e-Islami leader Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed for the second day at the International Crimes Tribunal-2.
In two hours and 40 minutes, Prosecutor Muklesur Rahman Badal completed closing arguments on first two of the seven charges against the Jamaat secretary general.
Citing testimonies of prosecution witnesses and documents, Badal said the prosecution was “able to prove” the charges.
The three-member Tribunal-2, led by Justice Obaidul Hassan, recorded his submission before adjourning the case proceedings until May 15, when the prosecution resume closing arguments.
ZIAUDDIN REPLIES
In compliance with a Tribunal-2 order on January 3 upon Brussels-based legal expert Ahmed Ziauddin to explain as to why legal proceedings should not be initiated against him for “obstructing fair process of the trials”, Ziauddin had sent his response.
The foreign ministry submitted the reply of Ziauddin to the registrar's office, AKM Nasiruddin Mahmud told The Daily Star yesterday.
On April 30, the tribunal directed the ministry to take necessary steps to collect Ahmed Ziauddin's reply, which he had submitted to the Bangladesh embassy in Brussels, and have it sent to the court.
The court had issued the directives, as it had not received any reply from Ziauddin although it had received information that Ziauddin had submitted his reply to the embassy.
The tribunal passed the January 3 order following the leak of the alleged Skype conversation between Ziauddin and former Tribunal-1 chairman Justice Nizamul Huq late last year.
The tribunal is expected to pass further orders in this regard today.