Print & Email
People hold a candlelight vigil at Shahbag Square demanding the execution of all war criminals from 1971. Photo: Reuters
How did the Shahbag protests begin?
Abdul Kader Mollah is an established war criminal who murdered 344 people. The tribunal has admitted it and Mollah has been given life sentence. We believe that the tribunal has tried its best; however it has some weaknesses and should be made strong. Before the tribunal judgement, there was a verdict of hanging of Mollah. But, he was absconding. We Bangladeshis are upset with the tribunal verdict. And we have come out to the streets to protest this verdict. Now, we are demanding punishment of all war criminals. We have made a six-point demand and have asked for ban of war crime tribunals across the world. Jamaat-e-Islami and its youth wing since the formation of Bangladesh have engaged in murders. They are responsible for growing terrorism through international terrorist organisations and we have demanded the ban of these organisations. The parties who sponsor these organisations should be prevented. We have appealed these groups to relinquish funding Jamaat. Several banks have stopped funding Jamaat. Bangladeshis have also stopped supporting these groups – their agencies like the banks, coaching centers, travel agencies. There is a social boycott that has already started.
On 21 February you announced to conclude the gathering at Shahbag. Was it because you were expecting that there would be violence the next day?
No. We were discussing the issue. There are more than 100 organisations including student, social and cultural groups. Even university based youth clubs are there. We sit regularly to discuss these issues. We don’t take any decision individually. Our primary demand of hanging Mollah was because the ruling government had no authority to appeal. Secondly, the decision making body was not there. The tribunal was brought through the appeal made to government. This is our primary achievement.
Our protest was getting confined around Shahbag Square only. We sat for 24 hours voicing our protests; however, we have to spread the movement. We would primarily get together around different spots in Dhaka and then move to the districts and towns. We have come up with our ‘plan-of-action’ based on that.
Tell us of the incident on 22 February that resulted in crowding? Was this expected?
We knew about it. Our declaration the day before had clear issues – we wanted to spread out and get together in different places. Our cultural activities – Protibadi Gaan would be carried out. There would be congregation every Friday. We have not treated it differently because there was a crisis the next day. Since it is a ‘people’s movement’, the direction and tone of the movement would also depend upon people.
Bangladesh is a one of the youngest countries in the world. What is the key reason for this surge in awareness among Bengali youth?
Socio-economic structure in Bangladesh has been changing rapidly. Bangladeshis have been seeing the change. If you do a financial analysis – the GDP, the growth which is six percent, we see that Bangladesh is growing fast in the region. In the education sector, we see that there were limited universities 10 years back. Many private universities have sprung up now.
Bangladeshi youth is amid change. They have become more aware, they have become well connected internationally. Internet connectivity has improved several folds. Four years before, nearly 20 to 30 lakh Bangladeshis used internet; now the figure has increased to 3.5 crore. Mobile users four years back was between one to one and half crore, now it has increased to eight and half crore.
About 2.5 crore are mobile internet users, the rest are broadband users. This is also a rapid change. Different mobile apps – the technological up-gradation has happened in the last four to five years. Perspectives among the youth has changed as a result of this. Youth gets know of Bangladeshi history and identity in a way which reading books did not give them.
Another incident that is really interesting that is also happening in India is that US is excited with Bangladesh being a secular country. Is your problem with Jamaat being in politics, or religion in politics?
My problem is with the Jamaat Shibir – they supported Pakistani army in 1971. It does not have a direct link with religion.
What has been the largest crowd figure?
Prior to 21 February, we had large crowds. On 10 February we noted a 10 lakh crowd figure. Even at night, there were huge crowds. It has reduced now. We are discouraging people from crowding at the Shahbag Square – we want people to come to our scheduled gatherings. We want people to get connected in the gatherings. We are not making calls to people to come to Shahbag. We are asking people to organise in their neighbourhood and mohallahs.
Elections in Bangladesh are in the next 10 months. Is Shahbag going to change the quality of elections in the country?
Our ideology is based from our experiences with the liberation war. We believe that politics in our country should be based on the foundation on which our country was formed.
Bangladesh politics at times is very violent. In terms of quality of politics, your method is civilised. What do you have to say about that?
Our activities are non violent. Protests should be made through non violent means – one can light a candle, hold the national flag or sing the national anthem. Politicians can also learn from ordinary people as they are protesting through non violent means. We welcome everyone; politicians should also come like ordinary people.
Would Shahbag throw up future leaders of Bangladesh?
We want Shahbag to spread out not just as political, but a cultural movement. Shahbag may throw up leaders, but it is a personal matter. I don’t appreciate it. I am not interested in that kind of politics.
India should not put her nose everywhere, It would be very nice If Indian teaches her own people how to use damn deodorant, you India’s are STINK
The interview deserves several comments. First, the title quotes Imran Sarkar as “‘We want Shahbag to spread out not as political but a cultural movement’”. That is, he DOES NOT WANT the Shahbag movement to spread as a political one. But,in answer to the last question Imran Sarkar said (according to this published piece),”We want Shahbag to spread out not just as political, but a cultural movement.” Here, the word ‘just’ implies that ‘political’ is included. That is, he DOES WANT the Shahbag movement to spread out as political (as well as cultural) movement. The difference between the two is in no way ignorable. Did the title misquote?
Secondly, there is a misinformation. The answer to first question includes “Before the tribunal judgement, there was a verdict of hanging of Mollah. But, he was absconding”. That cannot be. The verdict against Kader Mollah was the second vedict of the tribunal. The first one (a vedict of hanging) was against Abul Kalam Azad alias Bachchu Rajakar. Thirdly, answer to the first question also includes “We have made a six-point demand and have asked for ban of war crime tribunals across the world.” How can that be? Shahbag movement never asked for ‘ban of war crime tribunals across the world’. And, I am sure Imran Sarkar never said that.
Two United Nations human rights experts expressed concern on Thursday about the death sentence passed by the International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh against Mr. Abdul Kalam Azad, following a trial conducted in absentia that did not provide for all the guarantees of a fair trial and due process. In a second verdict issued on 5 February, the Tribunal sentenced Mr. Abdul Kader Molla to life imprisonment. Judicial proceedings are underway in several other cases and there is a risk that the defendants could also be sentenced to death.
“I am concerned by questions that have been raised about the impartiality of judges and prosecution services of the Tribunal, as well as their independence from the executive,” said Gabriela Knaul, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers. “Witnesses and lawyers for the defence have also complained about an atmosphere of hostility, intimidation and harassment,” she added. – See more at: http://www.unog.ch/unog/website/news_media.nsf/%28httpNewsByYear_en%29/56813FE83E407DCBC1257B0B00516190?OpenDocument#sthash.r6yLhXH8.dpuf
Lawyers representing the accused before the ICT have reported being harassed by state officials and threatened with arrests. Several witnesses and an investigator working for the defense have also reported harassment by police and threats for cooperating with the defense.
“Harassment of defense counsel and witnesses further tarnishes a flawed process,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “If the Bangladeshi government wants these trials to be taken seriously it must ensure that the rights of the accused are fully respected. That means making sure that lawyers and witnesses don’t face threats or coercion.”
Human Rights Watch has learned of threats made against a leading lawyer on the defense team of Delwar Hossain Sayedee, whose trial on charges of crimes against humanity was scheduled to begin at the end of September 2011 but has been delayed until November 20. The barrister, who wishes to remain anonymous, was warned by reliable and senior sources to stay away from his office. He was told that false charges were being prepared against him in order to arrest him and thus prevent him from participating in Sayedee’s defense.
Human Rights Watch has also learned that a key defense witness has been arrested. A journalist who was conducting research for the defense has been threatened with arrest and has since gone into hiding in fear for his life.
A further nine defense witnesses are facing criminal charges based on complaints against them filed with the police by a prosecution witness. Some prosecution witnesses have told defense counsel that they were coerced into providing statements to the prosecution and were warned against cooperating with the defense.
Human Rights Watch urged the government to investigate these cases to ensure they were not motivated to deny the accused a full and fair chance to answer the case against them.
http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/bangladesh-stop-harassment-of-defense-at-war-tribunal
Another senior lawyer and a prominent member of the Jamaat-e-Islaamiya party, Abdur Razzaq, faces an arrest warrant on charges relating to riots in Dhaka which took place in September. Razzaq, who was in Europe at the time of the riots, has been granted bail. He is expected to play a leading role in defending several of the accused. Human Rights Watch has learned from credible sources that ICT prosecutors are also seeking to formulate war crimes charges against Razzaq and that the current arrest warrant is intended to make it difficult for him to participate fully in preparing the defense.
http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/bangladesh-stop-harassment-of-defense-at-war-tribunal
The independence of the current trial was seriously compromised when a key defense witness disappeared on November 5. Shukho Ranjon Bali was originally a prosecution witness but had never appeared in court, having testified only in written statements — a provision of the trial singled out for criticism by Human Rights Watch.
Bali’s testimony was part of the trial of Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, an Islamic preacher and Jamaat stalwart accused of being involved in the killing of 50 people, rape, and arson. Bali was preparing to testify in court that much of his alleged prior testimony had actually been made up by the prosecution. “Witness Bali was a real threat to the prosecution,” says Razzaq. “If he had been in the witness box he would have had a shattering effect.”
Defense lawyers allege that Bali was picked up by the police as he was heading to court on November 5 to testify for their side. He has not been heard from since. Had he been able to testify in court as planned, this would have posed serious questions about much of the evidence brought before the tribunal.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/12/21/the_midlife_crisis_of_bangladesh?page=full&wp_login_redirect=0
Human Rights Watch has long supported the Bangladesh government’s efforts to provide justice for victims of the 1971 war, but has repeatedly warned that such efforts should conform to international fair trial standards…..
Human Rights Watch noted that Bali’s disappearance followed prosecution claims that they were unable to produce certain prosecution witnesses, including Bali. As a result, the prosecution applied for and was granted a motion allowing them to put into evidence written testimony without either direct or cross-examination. A defense challenge to this motion, which included evidence from government safe-house logbooks showing that witnesses were available to testify, was rejected by the court without a serious investigation.
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/01/16/bangladesh-find-abducted-witness
Bangladesh’s human rights situation worsened in 2012 as the government sought to narrow political and civil society space, continued to shield security forces from prosecution for abuses, failed to investigate disappearances and killings, and announced stringent rules to monitor non-governmental organizations, Human Rights Watch said in its 2013 World Report released today.
…………………
Human Rights Watch has long called for justice for victims in the 1971 liberation war. However, serious flaws in the law and rules of procedure governing these trials have gone unaddressed, despite proposals from the US government and many international experts.
Bangladesh: Government Backtracks on Rights
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/02/01/bangladesh-government-backtracks-rights
Toby M. Cadman, a renowned international barrister and an expert on war crimes tribunals, has called upon the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to hold an international conference either to reconcile the two belligerent groups in Bangladesh or pressure the government to conduct fair and transparent trials.
According to him, the Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) falls short of international standards and violates norms of fair trial spelled out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which Bangladesh is bound by.
Speaking to Arab News, he recalled a statement made by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, a former prime minister and father of Hasina, that Bangladeshis are a forgiving nation and that Bangladesh should look to the future not the past in the interest of peace and reconciliation. This was principally the reason for the trials being abandoned in 1973 and resulted in a tripartite agreement between India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
http://www.arabnews.com/saudi-arabia/international-community-urged-stop-‘summary-executions’-bangladesh
Bangladesh will come under widespread international criticism if the trial of war criminals is held under the International Crimes (Tribunals) Amendment Act 2009, which is not in conformity with international standards, said speakers at a seminar yesterday.
Steven Kay QC, one of the two-member delegation from the United Kingdom, said, “The current system of war crimes trial and its law in Bangladesh does not include international concerns, required to ensure a fair, impartial and transparent trial.
“You are importing things like ‘international crime’ but exporting your national and fundamental human rights. You are open to great criticism”.
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=158398
The Economist has heard 17 hours of recorded telephone conversations and seen over 230 e-mails between the two men…..
These e-mails, if genuine, would indeed raise questions about the workings of the court and we are bound to investigate them as fully as we can. It was in the course of those investigations that we contacted the two men….
Several questions are raised by all this. On what basis did the judge select the experts who would help him? Why was Mr Ahmed’s role not revealed to the court and to the public until the tribunal order on December 6th, after we had contacted him? The order refers to the presiding judge of the tribunal “receiving the support [of Mr Ahmed] on the developments on International Criminal law throughout the world” and taking assistance “during the proceedings of the trial and orders”. Why then did he tell us on December 5th that the two men had had no talks regarding the tribunal or regarding the proceedings? And why did he say that it would not be appropriate for a Supreme Court judge to talk to others about the proceedings?
http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2012/12/bangladesh
The e-mails and phone conversations we have seen raise profound questions about the trial. The material suggests the government tried to put pressure on Mr Nizamul, albeit he seems to have resisted it. It seems to show he worked improperly with a lawyer based in Brussels, and that the lawyer co-operated with the prosecution—raising questions about conflicts of interest. And in Mr Sayeedi’s case it points to the possibility that, even before the court had finished hearing testimony from the defence witnesses, Mr Nizamul was already expecting a guilty verdict.
These concerns are so serious that there is a risk not only of a miscarriage of justice affecting the individual defendants, but also that the wrongs which Bangladesh has already suffered will be aggravated by the flawed process of the tribunal. That would not heal the country’s wounds, but deepen them.
http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21568349-week-chairman-bangladeshs-international-crimes-tribunal-resigned-we-explain
” A U.S. State Department cable from February 2010 published by WikiLeaks bolsters the critics’ concerns, noting that “there is little doubt that hard-line elements within the ruling party [AL] believe that the time is right to crush Jamaat and other Islamic parties.”
Perhaps as a result, in November 2011 the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention ruled that “holding individuals in pre-trial detention in the absence of any reasoned and adequate explanation is unnecessary and disproportional to the aim sought.”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/12/21/the_midlife_crisis_of_bangladesh?page=full&wp_login_redirect=0“