At the beginning of the second session, following hearing a witness in the Azam case, the tribunal chairman passed an order regarding Sayedee’s case. Summary is below:
Today is fixed for recording defense witnesses. DW-9 Hemayet Uddin is produced by the defense and reexamined also. No more defense witness is produced today. They thought that another witness will be produced but as he is sick so he is not present. The beginning off witnesses was started in 2.9.12 when DW-1 was examined and re examined. In 5.9.12 DW-2 was examined and cross examined. Then in 9.9.12 there were no witness present to carry on the process. Then on 10.9.12 DW-3 was examined. In 11.9.12 the court was adjourned as DW-3 was sick and his cross examination was not completed. Then on 12.9.12 DW-4 was examined and re examined and no other witness was present there. Then on 13.9.12 no witness was present to carry on the process. Again in 16.9.12 DW-5 was examined. 0n 17.9.12 no witness was present. On 18.9.12 DW-5 was cross examined and no other witness was present. On 19.9.12 DW-3 was cross examined and again no other witness was present. On 20.9.12 no witness was present and court was adjourned. On 24.9.12 DW-6 was examined and cross examined and no other witness was present there. On 2.10.12 DW-7 was examined. On 3.10.12 DW-7 was cross examined and no other witness was present. On 4.10.12 DW-8 was examined and reexamined but there were also no other witness to carry on the proceeding then the tribunal passed an order to produce witness in the next day that means today otherwise proceeding would be stopped. Today there is also no other witness to be examined on the ground of sickness. Although defense witness Abdur Razzaq submitted that defense was trying but we find no development. Finding no other way we are passing this order. However considering all these event we are giving another chance to the defense. But they have to produce witness not only one but also sufficient witnesses for tomorrow. Otherwise Tribunal will stop taking further witnesses and proceed with the next step of trial.
This was the order then there were some altercation between defense and the chief of the Tribunal. Chief defense counsel Abdur Razzaq said that Sayedee’s prosecution had managed only 28 witnesses in nine long months, the full duration of liberation war while defense was given only one month. This is an injustice to us. He also said that defense would not be able to cooperate with the court after such an order. He said, the court never passed any such order in case of the prosecution despite numerous occasions were there where were unable able to produce witnesses. Then Justice Nizamul Huq replied that, this is our first case and we learnt from it and we are experimenting. Mr. Razzaq countered, saying, it seemed that the defense was bearing the brunt of the experiment. Then Justice Huq said that Mr. Razzaq we have passed an order and we want your cooperation. Then Mr. Razzaq agreed with it saying, certainly my lord but he continued to point out that court is doing an injustice to the defense and there were no such orders when prosecution failed to produce witnesses. Then Justice Huq agreed that it’s true that we didn’t pass any order but there were verbal orders and the court’s language had been rather harsh and they had been widely reported. Mr. Rzzaq still however continued with his objection but Mr. Huq brought it to an end saying that okay Mr. Razzaq we don’t want to hear anything about it, you produce witnesses tomorrow we will consider the situation. Then defense counsel reassured the Tribunal that, whatever the defense lawyers did would be within the bounds of law, we will continue to dispense our duty with professionalism. Prosecution lawyer Sayed Haider Ali stood up for giving the reply on behalf of the prosecution but judges did not hear him.