Banner Advertise

Thursday, May 14, 2009

[chottala.com] International Crimes (Tribunal) Act Remained Void Ab Initio



 
yes, your thinking is right. But i think this 'International Crimes (Tribunal) Act -1973' has already been null and void by simla agreement which was legimate by International Court of Justice by its correspondance letter on 14 December 1973-
 

'On completion of repatriation of Pakistani prisoners of war and

civilian internees in India, Bengalis in Pakistan and Pakistanis in

Bangla Desh referred to in clause (v) above, or earlier if they so

agree, Bangla Desh, India and Pakistan will discuss and settle the

question of 195 prisoners of war. Bangla Desh has made it clear

that il can participate in such a meetingonly on the basisof sovereign

equality . . ."
 
and then the tri-partite simla agrement was signed to remoe the accuisition against war criminals for friendly simbol.
 
pls see the web of International Court of Justice.
 
Kazi Mohammad Ismail


--- On Thu, 5/14/09, Isha Khan <bd_mailer@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Isha Khan <bd_mailer@yahoo.com>
Subject: [bangla-vision] International Crimes (Tribunal) Act Remained Void Ab Initio
To: "Dhaka Mails" <dhakamails@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thursday, May 14, 2009, 5:05 PM

International Crimes (Tribunal) Act Remained Void Ab Initio

–Dr. M.T. Hussain
 
There is a group claiming that trial of the 1971 'war crimes' could be done by the International Crimes (Tribunal ) Act, 1973 that followed four days after the First Amendment of the Constitution made on the 15th July 1973 and also based on that amendment. I am afraid, not.

First, it is a basic principle of legal jurisprudence that no law can be retrospectively effective. In this case the incidents of 1971 can have no scope to have cognizance by the act passed after about two years in mid 1973.

Second, they are putting in idea of the Cambodian war crimes trial having some backing from the UN that started on the 18th February 2009 of one Khmer Rouge prison commandant of Tuel Sleng, Kaing Guek Eav nick named Duch, who used to claim for execution order on behalf of the top leader Polpot. The distinct and very much crucial difference is that Cambodia remained the same and one country before and after the human rights violations said to have had perpetrated in late 1970s. That the case of Cambodia was only for changing the government or regime change from the toppled Khmer Rouge whose top administrative leader Polpot (already died) had been the key person to order for and execution of victims.
 
The regime change had nothing to do so far as the change of entity of Cambodia was concerned, much less any way was for creation of a different independent country as it happened in case of Bangladesh through secession from the sovereign and independent State of Pakistan as that lawfully stayed until the 16th December1971. Had the country remained one Pakistan as before 1971 and Bangladesh would not have emerged as a different and independent country after December 1971 and that would remain so until now, the successive government or changed regime could put the perpetrators of 1971 to trial as is being done in Cambodia remaining the same country.

Third, the dismemberment of the sovereign and independent State of Pakistan in 1971 through aggression of Indian armed forces actively aided by the Bangladesh Freedom Fighters did resort to no less in similar crimes of human rights violation as the alleged anti-Bangladesh lot did. Furthermore, the pro-Bangladeshi groups had perpetrated the crimes against humanity not only during the period but also even after the formal war ended on the 16th December 1971. These pro-Bangladeshi lots had been given indemnity by the post 1972 Bangladesh government.
 
In the same token of indemnity, the top leader announced in public that he forgave all of the 195 listed war criminals, as well, and so the Pakistani army's listed 195 were permitted to go without facing any trial whatsoever and so they gracefully went to their own country Pakistan (West ). There was at that time none, not a single person other than those 195 had been listed for war crimes. The issue of war crime was picked up later here in Bangladesh only recently despite the fact that the 1973 tribunal was enacted in mid July, 1973, and curiously since then none had been indicted under the provision of the tribunal, mainly because the 1973 Special Tribunal Act had been void ab initio for being in essence grossly violating the basic human rights, apart from many other internal and external issues of serious concern for the then government that forced them not to go for any trial under the Act, and that still now exists for which the original 195 are in all likely would remain untouched and outside the proposed trial to take on in 2009 in Dhaka. The small fries here would thus be made escape goats while the big fries would remain untouched that in itself would be nothing but abuse of justice, if not miscarriage of justice

Fourth, so far as the constitution of the International Crimes (Tribunal) Act was concerned, it violated basic fundamental rights of citizens provided in the Bangladesh Constitution so much so that even the right of appeal in the Supreme Court for fair trial and justice had been denied that clearly went against basic human rights the UN is committed to uphold. That is why the Bangladesh retired Chief Justice Habibur Rahman in a meeting held on the 23 March 2008 in Dhaka stated in unambiguous term that no fair trial would be feasible under the Act unless it would be amended in consultation with neutral international jurists.

Fifth, should anyone now pick up the issue of 1971 in terms of de jure legitimacy of Bangladesh in 2009, it should be quite logical to put the question open that those who acted with full knowledge for dismemberment of Pakistan having no mandate of the people in the question of secession might be a valid point to turn the table upside down. In fact, that fear of the post 1972 Bangladesh charismatic leader rightly intended to finish up the sad business saying 'let's forgive and forget'.
 




__._,_.___


[* Moderator�s Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.

* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[chottala.com] BDR REBELLION: Army inquiry court finds no militant, political link



Army probe restricted, many finds inconclusive

Sees BDR grievances main reason behind mutiny; refrains from probing external links satisfactorily

It is all about grievances of BDR soldiers over many issues, said sources about the recently submitted army probe report on the BDR carnage of February 25-26 that left 74 people dead including 57 army officers.

Daily Star Print Edition

NewAgeBD
Shahiduzzaman

The court of inquiry formed by the army found no link of militancy and politics to the February 25-26 soldiers' rebellion at the Bangladesh Rifles headquarters.
   The court of inquiry in its report submitted to the army chief, General Moeen U Ahmed on May 10, identified a dozen reasons, including soldiers' grievances and misunderstanding, for the rebellion.
   The summary of the report, a copy of which New Age obtained on Thursday, however, said no link of any civilian and political personalities to the rebellion could be found because of limitations in collecting evidence, verifying obtained information and confirming information sources.
   The government inquiry committee, formed to investigate the rebellion is, however, yet to submit its report. The report is ready and is likely to be submitted on Sunday, said sources in the home ministry.
   A copy of the report of the army's court of inquiry will also be submitted soon to the prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, who is also the defence minister.
   Reasons behind the rebellion as identified in the report includes wrong impression about the facilities of the army, lack of transparency in establishing and running BDR shops, delay in payment of duty allowances for the 2008 national elections, misunderstanding about lease and contracts of different works in the BDR headquarters, admission to schools in the headquarters and wrong impression about the BDR's director general Shakil Ahmed, his wife Nazneen Shakil and Dhaka sector commander Mujubul Haque's alleged involvement in the irregularities, and delay made by the home and finance ministries in resolving BDR problems.
   The report identified the operation 'dal bhat' as a major reason for the rebellion. It said punishment of some BDR soldiers for irregularities in the programme, getting blank or several forms signed by the soldiers for administrative requirement although they were entitled to get allowances for the programme, denial of their leaves and over-work had caused resentment among the soldiers.
   Curbing financial irregularities of the BDR soldiers by their officers from the army also instigated their resentment, the report said.
   As the army officers deputed to the BDR did not take any initiatives to correct the wrong impressions created among the soldiers about the officers, some of the soldiers could obtain support of others for the rebellion by distributing leaflets on February 21, the report observed.
   It also said undue interference in the administration by the families, friends and staff of some officers also caused resentment among the soldiers.
   The report said no evidence, information, documentary evidence and forecast of direct or indirect link of any local or external militant organisation to the rebellion could yet be found.
   As for any political links to the rebellion, it said some soldiers had contacted some civil personalities and political leaders before the national elections in 2008 to press home their demands violating the rules and regulations.
   It is presumable that certain civil and political personalities were naturally aggrieved by the army's role in aid of the civil administration during the immediate-past government.
   As some soldiers contacted civil and political personalities hoping to have their commitment to realising their demands, the civilian and political personalities could have used the soldiers as a weapon to take revenge.
   The report said local leader Torab Ali, also a former subehdar, his son Liton and former nayeb subehdar Kanchan's son Zakir were very much involved with the rebellion. As Liton is an illegal arms dealer, he could have helped the rebels to get arms of the Bangladesh Rifles.
   The report recommended a high-level inquiry by the intelligence agencies to look into the link of any other organisations, institutions and personalities to the rebellion.
   It observed the intelligence agencies had completely failed to inform the authorities of the meetings of the soldiers with certain civilian and political personalities.
   As the members of the BDR intelligence agency, Rifles Security Unit, were directly involved with the rebellion, they did not inform their authorities of the rebellion.
   On political negotiations, the report praised the home affairs minister, Sahara Khatun, state minister for LGRD and cooperatives Jahangir Kabir Nanak and other members of the teams for their highly courageous move to quell the rebellion.
   It, however, observed they had failed to take any timely measure for lack of their experience in quelling such rebellions and military matters.
   The report observed the scope for quelling the rebels before they could get organised could not be used as 350 Rapid Action Battalion members, who reached the three gates of the headquarters by 10:10am on February 25, were not allowed by their headquarters to conduct operations.
   Although the rebellion broke out at 9:30am, the rebels were not organised and they did not set up heavy weapons at the gates of the headquarters until 11:00am.
   Regarding the activities of the army, the report said the army personnel could not be deployed in time as they could not carry out any reconnaissance because of time constraint and necessary military weapons (armoured personnel carriers and tanks) were not readied in the Dhaka cantonment.
   The report, moreover, added the 46 Brigade could not play its role as the political personalities sought time to resolve the matter through negotiations.
   Although the army personnel were deployed around the BDR headquarters at 10:50am on February 25, they were ordered to go out of sight from the headquarters and the rebels got time to get organised.
   At 12:45pm on February 26, in the presence of army, air force and battalion personnel in the army headquarters, a plan was chalked up for military operation against the rebels. An H-hour, when a military operation begins, was set at 4:00pm in accordance with directives issued by the army chief's office at 1:30pm.
   As the home minister and her team were holding a meeting with the rebels in the BDR headquarters, the H-hour was changed repeatedly and finally the operation was cancelled at 5:50pm.
   According to the report, a team of 30 to 35 soldiers, in several groups, killed the officers in the Durbar Hall and the residence of the director general. Killing elsewhere was carried out later. The plan for the killing was initially limited to a few soldiers.
   Physical torture on the wives of the officers was planned and the list of the wives to be tortured had also been prepared before the rebellion broke out, the report said.
   The report observed immediately after the national elections, politicians, intellectuals and other personalities, in the parliament and television talk-shows, started character assassination of army officers, evaluating their activities of the preceding two years and it instigated the rebellion.
   The Inter Service Public Relations, public relations office of the army, failed to play any effective role in projecting correct information vis-à-vis the propaganda made by BDR soldiers who were giving wrong information, the report observed.
   It said 74 people — 57 army officers, 9 soldiers and 8 civilians — were killed in the rebellion.
   The report recommended exemplary punishment of the perpetrators under the Army Act and expeditious trial of the civilians, who might be found involved with the rebellion.
   It also recommended formation of a high-level court of inquiry to investigate the involvement of civilian personalities and institutions with the rebellion observing that the court of inquiry could not obtain information on them because of its limitations.
   It recommended that the name of the Bangladesh Rifles should be reorganised, by changing its name, uniform and infrastructure.


Govt committee's probe report
ready for submission

Staff Correspondent

The government's probe committee headed by former bureaucrat Anis-us Zaman, which missed another deadline, is going to submit the report 'very soon'.
   Anis-uz-Zaman told New Age on Thursday, 'We are ready to submit the probe report as it has already been competed. It will be submitted any time the government desires to see it.'
   Another source said that the report is likely to be submitted to the home affairs ministry on Sunday.
   Anis-us Zaman declined to share any of the findings before submitting the report to the government.
   Sources close to the committee said that the committee had appreciated the steps taken by the government to quell the mutineers, saying that the right decision had been taken at the right time.
   'If the government had been on the offensive, there would have been far more casualties in the BDR headquarters and in the densely populated localities that surround the Pilkhana since the rebel BDR soldiers had already taken possession of a huge quantity of arms and ammunition and would have retaliated desperately if they had been attacked,' said a source quoting the report.
   After thorough investigation, the committee had become sure that such a nefarious massacre in the Pilkhana had not taken place only because of the soldiers' 'deprivation' and for realisation of their various demands, including introduction of 100 per cent rationing system, but was a pre-planned massacre. The committee members also realised that outsiders had entered the Pilkhana during the mutiny, said sources.
   The committee also came to know that all the army officers were killed deliberately and not in the heat of the moment, and their houses were looted and torched and inmates subjected to inhuman torture as part of an evil conspiracy.
   Apart from this, the rebels were frantically hunting for one former RAB officer who had played a prominent role in the anti-militancy drive and later was sent on deputation to the BDR, and they called him by his name from a hide-out during the carnage and brutally tortured him to death, mentioned the committee in its report according to sources.
   The committee also observed that the main motive behind the BDR rebellion was to weaken the national economy and foil the trial of war criminals.
   The committee suggested the stepping up of counter-intelligence activities in the future to prevent the recurrence of such a kind of tragedy.
   It also recommended reconstitution of the BDR but cautioned that no innocent member of the BDR should lose his job.
   Sources told New Age that the committee interviewed several hundred people including rescued army officers and their family members, BDR soldiers and residents of the localities surrounding the Pilkhana before completing the report.
   The committee also examined the intelligence reports written before and after the mutiny and information extracted from the BDR men during interrogation at the Task Force Intelligence Cell.
   It also examined the information obtained from the call lists of the cell phones used by the BDR men, said sources.
   The committee, which missed its fourth deadline on Tuesday, completed its probe report on Wednesday and has now sought a date for submitting the much-awaited probe report to the government.
   It was given 30 more working days after it missed the deadline for the third time on March 29.
   The probe committee, which was reconstituted on March 2 by replacing home affairs minister Sahara Khatun with Anis-uz-Zaman as its chief, was initially given seven days to complete the task. The deadline was later extended by another seven days following an application by the committee.
   On expiry of that deadline, the government on March 23 allowed the committee to submit the report within four more working days.
   The eleven-member committee — comprising the law secretary, additional secretary to the home ministry, director-general of the BDR, representatives from the Cabinet Division, the armed forces, the Prime Minister's Office and the police — was asked to report within a week after the mutiny that left 75 persons, including 57 army officials, dead.
   Another probe committee of the Bangladesh Army headed by the quartermaster general, Lieutenant General Jahangir Alam Chowdhury, submitted its report to army chief General Moyeen U Ahmed on May 11, blaming 'Operation Dal-Bhat' as the main reason behind the carnage.
   The 20-member committee also found several other reasons behind the mayhem such as deprivation of facilities, disparity between BDR and army soldiers, non-payment of allowances during the general elections, controlling of tenders in the BDR headquarters and admission to BDR schools.


 



__._,_.___


[* Moderator's Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.

* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___