Dr. Manik
________________________________
From: Engr. Shafiq Bhuiyan <
srbanunz@gmail.com>
To: Syed_Aslam3 <
syed.aslam3@gmail.com>; Khobor <
khabor@yahoogroups.com>; notun
Bangladesh <
notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com>;
chottala@yahoogroups.com; Sohel
Mia paris <
sohelmia84@yahoo.ca>
Sent: Thu, August 26, 2010 2:21:15 PM
Subject: Re: Zia did more harm than Ershad: HC
Yes, it is fact.
"Sustha thakon, nirapade thakon ebong valo thakon"
Shuvechhante,
Shafiqur Rahman Bhuiyan (Anu)
Auckland
NEW ZEALAND.
Phone: 00-64-9-620 2603 (Res), 00-64-02 1238 5500 (mobile)
E-mail:
srbanunz@gmail.comN.B.: If any one is offended by content of this e-mail, please ignore & delete
this e-mail. I also request you to inform me by an e- mail - to delete your name
from my contact list.
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Syed_Aslam3 <
syed.aslam3@gmail.com> wrote:
Zia did more harm than Ershad: HC
>
>Thu, Aug 26th, 2010 10:40 pm BdST
>
http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?cid=2&id=171816&hb=top >
>Dhaka, Aug 26 (
bdnews24.com)—Even though autocrat H M Ershad had committed crime
>by suspending the constitution, military strongman Ziaur Rahman's crime was far
>greater in magnitude, the High Court has observed.
>
>
>The court in its verdict issued on Thursday said Zia had not only suspended the
>constitution but he also brought basic changes to its cardinal principles.
>
>
>The High Court made the observation while comparing the two military regimes in
>the verdict, declaring the Seventh Amendment illegal on Thursday.
>
>
>The bench of justices A H M Shamsuddin Chowdhury and Sheikh Mohammad Zakir
>Hossain in the ruling declared Ershad's military regime illegal.
>
>
>The Seventh Amendment to the constitution was passed in the parliament formed in
>1986 which legitamised the takeover of power by Ershad along with the martial
>law orders made between 1982 and 1986.
>
>
>Earlier on Aug 29, 2005, the High Court issued a verdict that had declared the
>Fifth Amendment illegal. It also had declared illegal the regimes of Khondker
>Moshtaq Ahmed, Abu Sa'adat Mohammad Sayem and Zia between Aug 15, 1975 and 1979.
>
>
>Regarding Zia, the verdict stated he had appointed a pro-Pakistan person (Shah
>Azizur Rahman) prime minister and rehabilitated a number of persons of the same
>belief and the killers of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and made grounds for
>religion-based politics.
>
>
>The court stated Ershad also illegally ruled the country just like Khondker
>Moshtaq Ahmed, Abu Sa'adat Mohammad Sayem and Ziaur Rahman and so, none of them
>can be pardoned. Ershad cannot get away from the consequences for what he had
>done.
>
>
>The verdict also said, Ershad took over the power from justice Abdus Sattar, the
>successor to Zia, and suspended the constitution. Mostaq and Zia, however, went
>on to change the constitution.
>
>
>The court also said some renegade army officers killed Sheikh Mujib on Aug 15,
>1975 with support from foreign powers. Moshtaq came to power even though he was
>not speaker or vice president and Zia took over from him.
>
>
>Zia had blocked the way to try the killers of Mujib by issuing the Indemnity
>Act. He removed the basic principles of the constitution which were included in
>light of the liberation war perspective, said the verdict.
>
>
>It also said, Zia, using martial law, had illegally penalised a number of
>freedom fighters including Col Abu Taher in military courts and tribunals.
>
>
>On Apr 5, the High Court asked the government to explain why the Seventh
>Amendment which legalised the takeover of power by Ershad along with the martial
>law instructions made between 1982 and 1986 was not illegal.
>
>
>The ruling came in response to a petition filed by Siddique Ahmed, a resident of
>Chittagong, who was convicted of murder during Ershad's martial law period.
>
>
>It, however, spared those decisions that were taken in public interest but
>declared the Fifth Amendment illegal.
>
>
>Additionally, the court had commented in that verdict, all the changes in the
>administration from Aug 15, 1975 till the parliament elections on 1991 were not
>made according to the constitution.
>
>
>The BNP-led coalition government had appealed for a stay order on the verdict.
>However, the ruling Awami League-led government withdrew the appeal.
>
>
>On Feb 2, the Appellate Division dismissed an appeal challenging the High Court
>verdict.
>
>
>
bdnews24.com/pc/gna/im/bd/2204h >
>
http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?cid=2&id=171816&hb=top >Related:
>
http://www.amadershomoy.com/content/2010/08/26/middle0958.htm >
>
>
