17 to 26 Dec 2012: prosecution closing, part 3

Due to the difficulty in following the details of the proceedings relating to prosecution closing arguments below is set out the prosecution's written synopsis, filed with the tribunal by the prosecutor. this part deals with the investigation officers testimony and the defense witnesses. (To see the first and second part of the closing argument synopsis.)

P.W-11 Monwara Begum (Part IO)
She said that she recorded the statement of P.W-03 Momena Begum daughter of Shahid Haxat Ali Loskor and Shahid Amina Begum and wife of Habibur Rahaman of Barordi, Section-l2, Block-D, Shatridbagh, 24'Late, Mirpur PS Pallabi, DMP, Dhaka on 13.08.2011 at Mirpur-IO Jallad Khana Pump house. She further said that at the time of occurrence in l97l their House No was -21, Lane No-05, Block-D, Section-l2, Mirpur, Dhaka. She further said in cross that she indentified the victim witness Momena Begum by inspecting the Jalladkhana Badhabhumi Sritipith. In that statemeni PW- 03 stated the occurrence in all the necessary details of the commission of the offence of several person under the leadership of the accused Abdul Quader Molla who by abetting, aiding and giving his complicity in the crime against the huminity and also by his direct participition in the occurrence.

P.W-12 Md. Abdur Razzak Khan (IO)
He in his statement made in the Tribunal giving the description of the 6 occurences showing the direct participation of the accused in the all the occurrences. He in giving his statement committed one bona fide mistake about the date in Alovdi occurence took place on24.04.1971. In all the statements and
evidence of all the witnesses as well in C.D and all the related papers it is seen and found that on 24.04.1971 the occurrence of genocide and murder and other inhumane Acts committed in Alovdi village. But he by mistaken he said 20.04.1971 in place of 24.04.1971 either due to bonafide slip of tongue or bonafide slip of print.

That-he further said that as he found prima facie case well made out against the accused Abdul Quder Mulla after proper investigation he submitted investigation report. He also committed another bona fide mistake in reply to cross that PW-03 Momena Begum was made witness in the occurrence of the killing of Shahid Khandaker Abu Taleb. But Momena Begum said in evidence in the Tribunal as well in her statement made to the PW-11 that she is for giving evedence for the brutal barbarious killing and gang rape of her family member in her house.
That in the cross examination of IO. nothing incriminating or fatal injury in the Prosecution case has been able to get by the defense.

In short I beg to place in my summation of the Prosecution case that we have been able to prove the Prosecution case against the accused Abdul Quder Mulla by adducing as many as 12 witnesses beyond the shadow of all reasonable doubt. So the accused by individual capacity, or group of individual, or as a prominent leader of Islami Chatra Songha (ICS). or as a leader /Member of Al-Badrs committed the offence of murder, genocide, abduction, confinement, torture, rape and gang rape or other inhumane Acts un-armed no-combatant Bengali civilian population or persecution on political racial or ethnic or religious grounds by abetting, aiding, by giving complicity and also by his direct participation and thereby he committed offence under sections 3(2) (a) (c) (g) (h) and 4(l) of Intemational Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 punishable under section 20(2) of the Act and capital punishment ( death sentence) should be awarded to the accused under the section of the Act.

Defense Witnesses
DW-01: That the accused of the case has been examined as DW-01. He admitted that at the time of study at Fariilpur Rajendra college he discharged the duty of the president of Islami Chatra Sanga and also he was the president of Islami Chatra Songha of Shahidulla Hall unit of Dhaka University.

He said in evidence that on I l/12 March, l97l he went to his own village home at Amirabad under Faridpur district and along with 30/40 students of University and college took training at Amirabad school maidan everyday given by one J.C.O named Mafizur Rahaman up to 30 April or first May, 1971. But none of them including said J.C.O turned up in the Tribunal to support that version of the accused as DW-01.

Then he said that he would live in the house of Dhala Mia Pir Sib and used to do business in a shop at Share Shatroshi Bazar with his eldest son on every Saturday and Tuesday within the whole period of on going liberation war. But none from the bazar shopkeepers. nor the said eldest son of Pir s/b and nor
even none of the members of pir s/b family turned of in the Tribunal to support that version.

DW-02:- Shushil Chandra Mandol said in evidence that 617 days after 7th March address of Bongobondhu the accused came to the house of his brother-in-law at Amirabad. But none from the house turned up in the Tribunal to support this statement.

He was gained over by the accused tadbirkars including a son of the accused and out of fear of possibility of changing the government he was compelled to turn up in the Tribunal to make false statement as dictated by the accused party men.

DW-03: Moslimuddin Ahmed is a best friend of the accused by virtue of study at Fazlul Haq Institute as well as Faridpw Govt. Rajendra college and also as a colleague in the profession of teaching at Shib Shunduri Academy.

That 8/10 days after 7th March address made by Bongobondhu there was a coincidence of meeting of the DW- 03 with the accused of the case said by this DW- 03. And also there one month after another co-incidence of DW- 03 with the accused at Chauddaroshi Bazar which all are false and he told like like this in favour of the accused as he has a very deep relation with him. He did not get any paper notice from the Tribunal. The son of this accused 8/10 days before requested him to come to the Tribunal to depose false statement as dictated by them.

DW- 04: This DW- 04 was a witness of prosecution. This DW- 04 also get any notice/paper from the Tribunal. But the son of the accused Qader Molla requested [her] to come to the Tribunal to depose in favour of the accused and also that day the said son of the accused brought him to the Tribunal. She narrated the occurence of the killing of Shahid Pollab, but left out the name of the accused tactfully from the involvement in the occurrence. As she was financially gained over she said in a cross that "I never heard the name of Quader Mollah until today’ which contradictory to her evidence given in chief.

DW - 05: This DW- 05 is the 6th brother among the brothers and sisters of pW- 06 Safruddin Molla ( it is found on cross examination at the top- at page- 03.) PW- 06 Safiuddin Molla at the time of occurrence aged about 19 years. He further said in cross that his next brother ( alive) Altabuddin Molla is junior to him by l2/l3 years. And this DW also said that his date of birth has been recorded as 10.04.1964. So at that time he was aged about 6/7 years only.

That this DW- 05 also said in evidence that at the time of occurrence he was in Sarulia, Savar. So he did not witness the occurrence. But very much intentionally being influenced politically as he is admittedly directly involved in BNP politics which is co-partner of Jamaat-e-Islami turned up of the Tribunal to falsely depose as dictated in favour of the accused like "there was no civilian with the Pakistan army’

DW-06: This DW- 06 as stated was an Imam of the Mosque of Shatridulla hall of D.U. and all through the period of on going liberation war since before 26th March I 971. He was never attacked by Pak Army or local parpetrators within the whole period. He had very good relation with the accused. So he told a lie for the accused that " ‘after three or four days after 7 March I saw Quader Molla was going to house with his bag and baggage.’ which as per his version was said to him by the accused. But he never accompanied him to see and say that the accused really had gone to his village home. So he did not know as to where although he was at the time of on-going liberation war.

That no DW could prove that the accused all through had been in his village home or had never been in Dhaka within the period on-goin liberation war.
So the very plea of Alibi has been totally disproved. In consideration of both the evidence of  he prosecution and the defense I beg to place in my sumation of the Prosecution case that we have been able to prove the Prosecution case against the accused Abul Quader Mulla by adducing as many as 12 witnesses beyond the shadow of reasonabie doubt. The accused by individual capaoty or group of individuals or , , or as a prominent leader of Islami Chatra Songha QCS). or as a leader/Member of Al-Badr committed the offence of murder; genocide, abduction, confinement, torture, rape and gang rape or other inhumane Acts against the humanity and made systematic and direct attrack on and upon the un-armed noncombatants bengali citizen population with intent to destroy the independence loving Bengali Civilian population either in whole or in part, or persecution on political racial or ethnic or religious or political group by abetting, aiding by giving complicity and also by his direct participation and thereby he committed crimes under 3(2) (a) (c) (g) G) and 4(l) of International Crimes Act punishabable under section 20(2) of the Act and capital punishment death sentence should be awarded to the accused for ends of and in the interest of Justice.