War Crimes Trial
Prosecution begins closing arguments against SQC
The war crimes prosecution on Sunday began its closing arguments against Bangladesh Nationalist Party lawmaker Salauddin Quader Chowdhury.
Prosecutor Zead-Al Malum opened the arguments in the International Crimes Tribunal 1 saying that Salauddin, also BNP standing committee member, was involved in atrocities during the country’s liberation war in 1971 in Chittagong.
He argued that Salauddin, in association with the Pakistani marauding army, was involved in the abduction of freedom fighters and unarmed civilians and torturing and killing them in confinement at his paternal home, Goods Hill, in Chittagong.
Malum said that Salauddin, accompanied by the army, committed looting, arson attacks, murder and genocide in different Hindu areas of Raujan in Chittagong.
Later, prosecutor Sultan Mahmud Simon began placing arguments on the factual aspects of the charges against Salauddin.
On Sunday, he argued on first three charges – the abduction of Matilal Chowdhury and five others on April 4 or 5, 1971 and subsequent torture and killing of them, genocide at Madhya Gohira under Raujan on April 13, 1971 and the killing of Natun Chandra Sinha at Kundeshwari in Chittagong on the same day.
Salauddin, facing the trial on 23 counts of genocide and crimes against humanity, was in the dock.
Prosecutor Sultan argued that the prosecution proved the charge of abduction, torture and killing of Matilal Chowdhury and five others from Matilal’s house at Khatunganj in Chittagong through the testimony of prosecution witness Debbrata Sarkar, son of a victim.
He said that tow three eyewitnesses and a hearsay witness testified that Salauddin, along with his men and marauding Pakistani army, committed genocide at Madhya Gohira under Raujan on April 13, 1971.
The prosecutor said that they examined six witnesses, including two eyewitnesses and four hearsay witnesses, to prove the charge of killing Kundeshwari Oushadhalaya founder Natun Chandra Sinha at Kundeshwari.
He argued that Salauddin and his defence counsel cross-examined all the witnesses but failed to discredit the evidence given by the witnesses and that each of the witnesses for the second and third charges corroborated what others stated.
His arguments remained incomplete when the tribunal adjourned the hearing till today.
At the beginning of the proceedings, Salauddin’s defence lawyer Fakhrul Islam submitted a petition seeking revision of the tribunal’s July 24 order and deferral of the closing arguments.
On July 24, the tribunal closed examination of Salauddin’s defence witness as the defence repeatedly failed to produce their fifth and the last witness before the tribunal.
Moving the petition, Fakhrul argued that they wanted to produce Justice Shamim Hasnain, a High Court judge, as the fifth defence witnesses and they needed an adjournment of the proceedings to produce him.
He submitted an application written by Justice Shamim to the chief justice seeking his permission for appearing before the tribunal.
The tribunal, however, asked the prosecution to begin its closing arguments and said that the hearing on the application was not scheduled for Sunday and if the tribunal thought that the application should be heard, it would set a later date for the hearing.
The tribunal on July 24 had set July 28 to July 30 for placing arguments by the prosecution and July 31 to August 5 for the arguments by the defence.
-With New Age input
