Thursday, July 5, 2012

20 May 2012: Chowdhury 1st witness cross exam day 4

Before the main session started Barrister Fakrul Islam drew the attention of the Tribunal to an article published in the Daily New Age, which has raised questions about about the justification of being able to prove the offence from the statement of prosecution witness Professor Dr. Anisuzzaman. The tribunal chairman said that the is error in the report, and that they would say nothing further.

Half way through the morning proceedings, the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia entered the Court Room to observe the proceedings.

Justice Nizamul Huq then raised an issue about a suspicious packet which had been brought into the tribunal. He said that from now on, everyone is barred from bringing their food into court.

Ansanaul Haque for the defence counsel then continued his cross examination of Dr Anissusaman who was the first witness to give evidence against Salauddin Quader Chowdhury (continuing from the previous week)
Defence: When did you met Mr. Profullo Chandra for the last time?

Witness: 2 to 3 years ago.

Defence: Have you talked about this case?

Witness: No.

Defence: Do you know Badruddin Ahmed?

Witness: No.

Defence: Do you know Fazlus Sobhan Chowdhury?

Witness: No.

Defence: Do you know Fazlur Kabir Chowdhury, who is the elder brother of Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury and who was a supporter of Muslim League and was the leader of opposition party of the provincial council.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury has been elected by the Government as a secretary general.

Witness: I’ve read it at the newspaper.

Defence: Have you read all the speeches of the accused Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury, given at the Parliament since 1979 till recent days?

Witness: I’ve read some speeches in the newspapers.

Defence: Ideologically, you and the accused do not possess any similarity.

Witness: No, there is no similarity.

Defence: He believes that Almighty Allah is the source of all powers whereas you do believe people are the sources of all powers.

Witness: [maintained silence.]

Defence: You have visited Kundeshwari several times before and after the liberation.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Do you know whether there is any tea stall of two people named “Bholaiya and Bothaiya” there at the adjacent road of Kundeshwari?

Witness: I don’t know.

Defence: When you met Notun Chandra Singha for the last time what was the last conversation of both of you?

Witness: On 2nd April, 1971 I’ve met him for the last time. I’ve expressed my gratitude to give us the shelter in Kundeshwari Complex but due to the sudden lack of safety, I was leaving Kundeshwari. Then forbade me and stated he will never leave the complex.

Defence: Whether he could apprehend that the Kundeshwari complex would have been raided by the Pakistan Army?

Witness: I don’t know.

Defence: Did you ever discuss with other people about the safety of the Kundeshwari complex?

Witness: I’ve discussed with Profullo Chandra Singha and other teachers.

Defence: Intentionally you’re avoiding giving statements about Shotto Ronjon Singha who is another son of Notun Chandra Singha.

Witness: No.

Defence: On the very day of the murder of Notun Chandra Singha, the Pakistan Army organized a massacre on the nearby Muslim, Buddhist (Borua) area along with Kundeshwari complex.

Witness: Yes, But I don’t know from where the attack was started.

Defence: Fazlul Quader Chowdhry maintained a good personal relationship with Bangabandhu?

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Fazlul Quader Chowdhry was an advocate of Pakistan Supreme Court.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Fazlul Quader Chowdhry has signed a power of attorney in favor of Bangabandhu in the case of Agortola Conspiracy Case.

Witness: I don’t have any knowledge about it.

Defence: When you left the place on 21st or 22nd April, 1971 then Ramgor was not occupied by Pakistan Army.

Witness: No it was not occupied.

Defence: When Profullo Chandra Singha had stated the incident of killing of Nuton Chandra Singha, did you suggested him to file a case.

Witness: No.

Defence: Whether it was suggested that he should file a General Diary entry?

Witness: No.

Defence: In 1972, did Mr. Sottoronjon Singha file two separate cases for the killing of his father and pillaging of their house.

Witness: I don’t know.

Defence: Whether you have asked about the matter to Profullo Chandra Singha or SottoRonjon Singha?

Witness: No.

Defence: Whether Profullo Chandra has written any article about the killing of his father?

Witness: It is not in my knowledge.

Defence: Whether you suggested that a case should be filed when you went towards Kundeshwari in 1972 to express your gratitude?

Witness: No.

Defence: Whether at 1970 you were a voter from the area from where Mr. Fazlul Quader Chowdhury from Muslim League and Professor Md. Khaled has contested on the election?

Witness: Yes.

Defence: How many non Muslim voters were there at the electoral area?

Witness: I don’t know.

Defence: Whether there were less than 15% non Muslim voters in that area?

Witness: I don’t know.

Defence: Hazari Polli, Pond of Dewanji and Jamal Khan were very close to Goods Hill.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Whether this area holds a great number of non Muslim people?

Witness: I don’t know anything about Jamal Khan area, but the other areas do possess high numbers of non Muslim people.

Defence: Fazlul Quader Chowdhury had 4 sons. Among them 2 were involved with politics. And Giyasuddin Quader Chowdhury was the President of Chittagong north districts pole.

Witness: They were involved with politics but I don’t know whether he was the President of that political party.

Defence: At the time of looting and killing at Kundeshwari, which one started first, looting or killing?

Witness: I don’t know.

Defence: Whether Pakistan Army went there on that very day and searched and damaged the rooms.

Witness: I don’t know.

Defence: There were no incident of killing and torture at the “Goods Hill”.

Witness: I’ve heard some kinds of incidents like killing and torture happened there but I didn’t see those.

Defence: In 1946, 1947, 1961, 1965, 1971—so many people have left towards west Bengal, India and didn’t return.

Witness: Yes

Defence: So many people of Chittagong left the area and are living there at EN Bypass of Chobbish Porgona and Barasat.

Witness: I don’t know.

Defence: That you heard that some people were being killed and tortured—that’s not true.

Witness: I’ve stated the things which I have heard as true.

Defence: At Ramgor on 21st/22nd April, 1971 you didn’t hear anything about the killing of Nuton Chandra Singha?

Witness: It’s not true. I have heard.

Defence: You and the accused are ideologically different- that’s the main reason you have stated false statements.

Witness: Not true.

Defence: From when you know Nuton Chandra Singha? For how many times did you meet him?

Witness: I know him from the onset of 1969 or 1979 and before his killing at 1971 I’ve met him several times.

Defence: Since your student life you are very much aware about the political leaders and politics.

Witness: I know everything might not be correct. I’ve tried to find out myself about the activities of the political groups.

Defence: The present Government party was empowered from1971 to 1975.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: The International Crimes Tribunal Act-1973 has been passed on 1973.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Again the present Government was in power in 1996 to 2001. During that time no tribunal has been formed for this cause.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Mr. Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury has no animosity with Nuton Chandra Singha.

Witness: I didn’t say that.

Defence: You are looked on well by the present Government so that to please them, you are giving false statements- in regard of the accused.

Witness: Not true.

Defence: You have given wrong information about the date, time and incidents of Nuton Chandra Singha killing and torture issue.

Witness: Not true.

Defence: About Notun Chandra Singha killing and the torture of Professor Salehuddin what you have said is just a hearsay.

Witness: Not true. Salehuddin was being tortured there.

Defence: After 12 years of the incident, you have heard about the occurrence of torture on Salehuddin in the Senate Meeting of Chittagong University, so it’s not true.

Witness: Not true.
The Court was adjourned till 2 pm

No comments:

Post a Comment