This third section deals with the arguments that the defense made about the charges themselves.
(to see the prosecution closing arguments, click here)
General Legal Considerations
The Defence highlights that the current indictment contains both cumulative and duplicitous charging. In Charges 2 to 6, the Accused is charged with several forms of individual criminal responsibility including “direct participation”; “complicity namely ordering” and “aiding and abetting” within the same count. These have not been charged in the alternative and as a result the indictment remains defective in its current form (Charge 2, 3, 4: direct participation and complicity; Charge 5 and 6: direct participation, complicity and aiding and abetting)
Furthermore, in Charge 4, the Accused is charged with the murder of 24 specified victims [(1) Mozammel Haque; (2) Nabi Hossain Bulu; (3) Nasir Uddin; (4) Aswini Mondol; (5) Brindabon Mondol; (6) Hari Nanda Mondol; (7) Reantosh Mondol Zuddin; (8) Habibur Rahman; (9) Abdur Rashid; (10) Miaz Uddin; (11) Dhoni Matbor; (12) Brindabon Mridha; (13) Sontosh Mondol; (14) Bitambor Mondol; (15) Nilambor Mondor; (16) Laxzman Mistri; (17) Surja Kamar; (18) Amar Chand; (19) Guru Das; (20) Panchananon Nanda; (21) Giribala; (22) Maran Dasi; (23) Darbesh Ali and (24) Aroj Ali.] and Osman Gani and Golam Mostafa on 25 November 1971 in the villages of Khanbari and Ghotar Char in Keraniganj, Dhaka. It is submitted that the murder of Osman Gani and Golam Mostafa is a distinct offence from the alleged killings of the 24 specified victims and therefore Charge 4 contains two separate incidents. As a result, it is submitted that this form of duplicitous charging is prejudicial to the Accused as it fails to differentiate between separate events within one charge even though the other 5 counts only specific one incident per charge. The end result is that any conviction or acquittal of an offence within a multi-offence count will not be recognized which is particularly important at the sentencing stage.
Notwithstanding these defects in the indictment, the Defence relies on its submissions and reiterates that the Prosecution has failed to establish the contextual elements of crimes against humanity beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Defence further submits that the Prosecution has failed to establish the existence of any affirmative instruction or order given by the Accused in relation to Charges 1 to 6. It is further noted that the Prosecution has failed substantially contributed to the allegations charged or indeed directly perpetrated the following offences.
Charge 1: Murder as a crime against humanity The Prosecution relies on the live testimony of PW 2 (Syed Shahidul Hoque Mama) and PW 10 (Sayed Abdul Kaiyum).
The Defence submits that the evidence adduced in relation to Charge 1 is unreliable. The testimonies of PW 2 and PW 10 do not state how they came to know about the alleged killing of Pallab or indeed how they came to know that it was commissioned at the order of the Accused. There is indeed no evidence of any order being made. They do not allege that they were present during the alleged commission of order or subsequent offence. The two testimonies thus amount to nothing more than unattributed hearsay to which the relevant hearsay considerations must be applied.
The Defence further highlights the lack of detail concerning the murder of Pallab. Neither witness is able to specify the link between the Accused and Al-Badr. Indeed, neither witness is able to comment as to whether Akhter Gunda, a member of Al-Badr, would have committed the offence regardless of any order from the Accused. This is in stark contrast to DW 4 (Mrs Sahera) the Vabi (Sister-in-law) of the victim Pallab, who testified that she had never heard of the Accused being involved in the killing of her brother: “Pallab was killed by Akther Gunda and Biharis during 1971 liberation war. We came back from Savar to Mirpur after the liberation war. Akter Gunda & Biharis killed Pallab at Muslim Bazar Eidgah field. I heard that my brother in law went to India to join in liberation war, caught from Nawabpur and killed at Muslim Bazar. I heard from people about Pallab killing incident. I never gave any witness statement to any one regarding this case before” (DW 4, Examination in chief, 2 December 2012).
During cross-examination, DW 4 is adamant of the fact that the Accused gave no order instructing the killing of her brother: "I did not listen that Quadr Molla was the leader of Islami Chatra Songo, I never listen the name of Quader Molla. I did not hear that, though my Brother in law (Tun-tuni) was the organizer of Freedom fighting that’s why with the order of Quader Molla his name was kept in the list of killing. I don’t know that, whether with the order of Quader Molla, Akter Gunda, Hakka Gunda, Nehal and others Bihari caught and brought him from Nobabpur. No names were known to me except Akter Gunda, because at that time I was a newly married wife. I did not hear that with the order of Quadr Molla Akter Gunda killed Pollob by shooting and cutting down his fingers. Till today I did not hear the name of Quader Molla.
Furthermore, it is submitted that despite the lack of detail in the testimony of PW 10 it is still apparent that the testimonies of PW 2 and PW 10 contradict one another. PW 10’s testimony indicates that the Accused directly perpetrated the killing of Pallab as opposed to ordered or planned it, as alleged in the charge and stated by PW 2.
Finally, the Defence brings the inconsistencies in PW 10’s testimony to the Tribunal’s attention. PW 10 made 4 significant previous inconsistent statements in his testimony. These were all material inconsistencies that concerned the Accused’s alleged involvement in the allegations: “It is fact that, the witness Saiyod Abdul Quiyum (PW-10) didn’t say to me during my investigation that, the names, Noim Khan, Sofiruddin, Certain Molla are mentionable who worked for election symbol scale…It is fact that, this witness didn’t say me that, the miscreants stopped and went away when certain Molla came there. But he said to me that, the Bihari flew away when the Molla came out. I didn’t examine that Molla because he is not alive. It is not fact that Molla is alive. [To court] I didn’t get the full name of that Molla during my investigation… It is not fact that, the above-mentioned Molla was involved at the election campaign of prof. Ghulam Azam and I make involved the accused falsely instead of the above-mentioned Molla for the purpose of attaining ill motive of the government…… It is fact that, it is not mentioned in the statements of the witness Sayiod Abdul Quiyum (P.W 10) that the miscreants stopped and went when the certain Abdul Quder Molla came out after hearing my shouting who lived beside of the place of occurrence or the messenger from Molla sent message to the house of Mr. Abu Taleb and after hearing the news Mr. Abu Taleb came with gun along with some people…” (PW 12, Cross examination, 1 & 4 November 2012).
For these reasons, it is submitted that the Prosecution has failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the Accused is guilty of the allegations as pleaded in Charge 1.
Charge 2: Murder as crimes against humanity The Prosecution adduced the testimony of PW 2 (Syed Shahidul Hoque Mama), PW 4. (kazi Roza) and P.W. 10.
During cross examination, PW 4 testified that she came to know about this information from unidentified sources: “I got the message of the killing of Meherunesa from the mass people. I heard the message at 27 March but from whom I heard first is not specific now. I heard…when I was in my aunt’s house at Kolabagan…I heard…from the people who left Mirpur but now I can’t remember their name. I have no connection from those I heard about the killing”. (PW 4, Cross examination, 26 July 2012)
Both the testimonies of PW 2 and PW 4 are based upon unattributed hearsay, both stating they have been told by the generic ‘masses’. Although PW 4 offers considerable detail, by her own admission she states that she cannot recall who told her and has no affiliation with such people. She does not state how she knows that the Accused attended the victim’s house or whether he was directly involved in perpetrating the alleged killings or indeed participated in some other form. She further does not state who warned her of the risk to her and indeed the victim’s life. Neither PW 2 or PW 4 admit to knowing the Accused, indeed PW 4 testified that: “I never met with Quader Molla or talk with him. I never met with Quader Molla in any meeting, procession or in university. It is necessary to talk to know. I never did talk with him. I didn’t see Quader Molla in the polling centre. I heard the name of Quader Molla many times since the election in 1970. It is not correct that I verify Quader Molla in dock first ....”.
This further adds to the fact that both witnesses rely on nothing more than salacious gossip that remains traceless in terms of individual source or indeed timing.
The Defence further notes that despite making the accusations before these proceedings, PW 4 has never made any similar previous allegation in public despite having the opportunity to. PW 4 testified that despite devoting her career to the victims of the conflict and publishing a book entitled “Martyered Poetess Meherunesa”, the Accused was never mentioned throughout the book: “‘I didn’t mention his name in my book martyred Poetess Meherunesa as there was not system for trial of war criminals” (PW 4, Cross examination, 26 July 2012).
Finally, the Defence brings the inconsistencies in PW 4’s testimony to the Tribunal’s attention. PW 4 made 3 significant previous inconsistent statements in his testimony. These were all material inconsistencies that concerned the Accused’s alleged involvement in the allegations: “It is fact that, witness Kazi Rosi (PW-4) didn’t say me during my investigation that, Quader Molla and his accomplices was tied with white tape or red tape on their head at 11.00 am… It is fact that, the witness Kazi Rosi (PW-4) didn’t say me that, Meher wanted to live by taking Quran in her chest when they entered in their house for killing… It is fact that, Poetess Kazi Rosi (PW4) didn’t tell me that she wanted to go to Meherunnesa’s house after independence but she knew that any other person was lived at their house […]”. (PW 4, Examination in chief, 1 November 2012)
For this reason, the Defence challenge the reliability of the Prosecution evidence and submit that the Prosecution has failed to establish that the Accused directly participated in the killings of Meherun Nesa, her mother and two brothers or indeed participated in the plan to commission such a crime. No evidence has been adduced as the Accused’s specific role in such allegations. As such, it is submitted that the Prosecution has failed to prove the Accused’s involvement beyond a reasonable doubt.
Charge 3: Murder as crimes against humanity
The Prosecution relies on the live testimony of PW 5 (Khandakar Abdul Ahsan) and PW 10 (Sayed Abdul Kaiyum) the former being the son of the alleged victim in Charge 3.
Both testimonies in relation to this charge amount to no more than hearsay evidence, which largely remains unattributed. Despite being the victim’s son, PW 5 was not present during the alleged killing of his father, as admitted in cross examination. Similarly PW 10 was not present during the alleged killing and was told of the killing at least a year after the event (Although PW 10 testified that he returned to Dhaka in 1972, he does not specify when he was told of the allegations.)
Both PW 5 and PW 10 attribute part of their knowledge of this accusation to a driver named Nazim. It is highlighted that Nazim is not a Prosecution witness and was not attempted to be called despite PW 5 stating that he is still alive and in Pakistan: “Driver Nizam drove our car possibly for two years who is still alive and now in Pakistan” (PW 5, Cross examination, 29 July 2012)
Due to both testimonies solely amounting to at best secondary hearsay evidence, neither witness is able to establish the Accused’s distinct role in the allegation. Neither states that the Accused directly perpetrated the killings, ordered or planned the offences. The Prosecution has thus failed to produce any evidence to this element.
Once again, in the absence of any direct evidence regarding the Accused’s role in the commission of offence, it can be reasonable inferred that Al-Badr members including Akhter Gunda would have committed the crimes regardless of any affirmative act or instruction from the Accused.
The reliability of the evidence adduced to this charge is further diminished by the fact that PW 5 has previously entered a complaint with regards to the alleged looting of his home in 1971. By his own admission, he did not mention the killing of his father: “I filed a GD in Mirpur about looting our home, setting fire but I didn’t file anywhere about my father’s killing”.
Finally, the Defence highlights the inconsistent statements made by both PW 5 and PW 10 that undermine the evidence adduced. The material inconsistent statements made by PW 10 are detailed above and are equally applicable here. PW 5 also made previous a inconsistent statement in his testimony that affects the Accused’s alleged involvement in the criminality. As accounted for by PW 12, PW 5 did not mention that the Accused was leader of the ICS in his statement to PW 12: “It is fact that, the witness Khondokar Abul Ahsan (PW-5) didn’t tell that; Abdul Halim brought his father to Mirpur and took him to Quader Molla. But this witness told me that, He heard from Khalil that, Halim brought his father to Mirpur by his car” (PW 12, Cross examination, 1 November 2012 ).
The combination of two unreliable accounts and multiple material previous inconsistent statements results on both testimonies results in the fact they cannot be relied upon in the absence of any other evidence to establish the Accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in relation to Charge 3.
Charge 4: Murder as crimes against humanity
The Prosecution relies on the live testimonies of PW 1 (Mojaffar Ahmad Khan), PW 7 (Abdul Majid Palaun) and PW 8 (Nurjahan)
The Defence submits that the evidence adduced by PW 1, PW 7 and PW 8 is unreliable and in light of the following submissions should not be afforded any weight. The reliability of each testimony is looked at in turn.
In relation to the testimony of PW 1 it is submitted that there is no direct evidence from PW1 that he directly witnessed any of the events described in his testimony. The allegation that Osman Goni and Golam Mostafa were murdered came after the event in a hearsay allegation by his father. It is important to highlight that his father did not apparently claim to have seen the murders himself resulting in another example of unattributed multiple hearsay.
PW1 failed to explain how he came to know about the murders of individuals in Gatarchor. He did not state who told him, or whether the person that told him observed the events directly. It can thus be reasonably assumed that this allegation is mere rumour.
The fact that PW1 saw his house burning is direct evidence that his house was burned, but nothing more. The fact that he saw the bodies of Osman Goni and Golam Mustafa and the bodies of many more in Gatorchar is evidence of nothing more than that people died. It is not evidence of who was responsible; most importantly it is not evidence against the Accused.
It is further clear that PW 1’s evidence in relation to the meeting held at Gatorchar on 23/24 November 1971 is purely hearsay. PW1 does not state that Abdul Majid claimed to have been there himself. Nor does PW1 state from whom Abdul Majid obtained the information about the meeting. As a result, the allegations that the meeting was arranged by communication with the Accused and that he was present is no more than multiple hearsay and rumour. PW 1 continuously failed to specify the source of his account. Indeed, the Defence further submits that PW 7 was also unable to provide any direct evidence regarding the meeting on 25 November 1971 thus amounting to no more than hearsay.
In relation to PW 1’s claim that he saw the Accused near Mirpur PTC “with arms along with his associates” (PW 1, Examination in chief, 3 July 2012) it is submitted that this is not evidence that the Tribunal may use to convict of Charge 4. The event is not dated and there is no evidential nexus to the killings in November. The associates are not identified. The reason for carrying arms is speculative. Regarding Charge 4 this evidence is irrelevant.
Finally, PW 1’s accusation that “genocide set fire and looting in Gatorchar was organized by the local Razakars with the leading of Abdul Quader Molla” is not justified in the evidence. PW1 attempts to give no nexus between the Accused and the events. He is unable to give any eyewitness or reliable hearsay account that the Accused contributed to the murders in any manner.
The reliability of PW 1’s testimony is further called into question by the fact he admitted in cross examination that in his complaint of 2007, he neglected to mention the meeting of 23/24 November, or any alleged role played by the Accused: “I filed the CR case on 17 December 2007 which I stated at my statement. The occurrence of 25 November is stated at CR case but the meeting held at 23 or 24 November is not mentioned. The presence of Quader Molla or consultancy with him for call meeting is not stated at that CR case” (PW 1, Examination in chief, 9 July 2012)
He further admitted he did not mention ‘that genocide setting fire looting held at 25th November by the local Razakar consulting with Abdul Quader Molla’ in the 2007 complaint. Taking his evidence into account, and the fact that he failed to mention significant aspects of his current allegation in 2007, it is submitted that PW 1 has failed to give any relevant evidence against the Accused.
Although PW 7 alleges to be an eyewitness, he provides no evidence as to the conditions in which he was able to allegedly observe the events. Of note, he also does not establish how he was able to recognize and therefore identify the Accused at the time. Indeed, the Defence questions as to why no previous complaint was made by PW 7 prior to his testimony given his status in the community as “President of Awami League of [his] ward”.(PW 7, Cross examination, 13 August 2012 )
With regards to PW 8, it is submitted that the witness made no attempt to identify the Accused as the individual that killed her husband. No description of this individual is indeed given nor any detail on the event in general despite allegedly witnessing the entire account. PW 8 is only told some time after that the Accused is allegedly responsible for the killing of her husband. She did not state when she was told or by whom. Furthermore, it is submitted that the majority of PW 8’s testimony was the first time it was heard before this Tribunal.
In her testimony, PW 8 made 4 material inconsistent statements that concerned the Accused’s alleged involvement in the allegations: “Witness Nurjahan (PW-8) didn’t tell me during my investigation that, she was 13 years old during the occurrence. She didn’t tell me that, she was pregnant during the occurrence. She didn’t tell me that she along with her husband hid under the bed and came out after a while when firing was stopped and she saw that Pak army was coming from the field or she heard the sound of shoot after going there or she saw her husband and Mojammal Hoque, uncle in law was dead and fallen there at that yard……It is fact that, this witness didn’t tell me that, she saw there was a Bengali men with Pak army who was short and and black or this witness went to catch her husband with crying or the mentioned Bengali black and short men threat her with black thing and she went away… It is not fact that she did not say that she picked up his husband from the ground about half past ten or eleven o`clock or she can see dust of her husband’s face and forehead or touching her husband’s chest she saw the blood there. Then she screamed and informed his mother in law to come to the spot or she did not say before the investigation officer that afterwards 5/6 person brought her husband to his own house…… It is fact that this witness did not say such way that she heard from her father in law that Quader Mollah of Jamat killed her husband” (PW 12, Cross examination, 1 and 4 November 2012).
It is submitted that the above inconsistent statements directly affect the accuracy and reliability of PW 8’s testimony. This is despite her apparent eyewitness account of the allegations.
In the absence of any compelling evidence against the Accused, it is submitted that he should not be held responsible for the crimes alleged in Charge 4.
Charge 5: Murder as crimes against humanity
The Prosecution relies on the live testimony of PW 6 (Shafiuddin Molla) and PW 9 (Amir Hossen Molla )
It is submitted that the reliability of PW 6’s testimony is in question on account of his tendency to exaggerate. Although allegedly bearing witness to the killings of 344 individuals by over 50 people, including members of the Pakistani Armed Forces, he is unable to explain how he was able to see the entire incident or indeed why he did not flee as soon as the first shots were fired. This is of particular note considering that his entire family had already fled the village. (“My mother along with my brothers and sisters went out before a week of the occurrence and my father went out at the evening before the day of occurrence from the village. The women and children of my uncle’s house went out before a week or 10 days earlier from the village. Many a villagers went out from the village before a week or 10 days earlier or before more days at the same way. Many a villagers went out from the village after the occurrence of 25 March…”, PW 6, Cross examination 1 ,August 2012. )
Furthermore, by his own admission, he must have been at some distance hiding in the bush as he was unable to hear what was being said between the Accused and the Pakistani Army. This does not however, prevent him from making the assumption that the Accused was conversing in Urdu. The witness fails to explain how he was able to identify the Accused, how he knows the Accused spoke Urdu in 1971 or indeed whether the witness himself understood the language at the time. PW 5 is unable to provide an accurate account and thus relies on exaggeration.
It is submitted that the issues surrounding the inaccuracies and exaggerations made by PW 6 are further exacerbated by the number of previous inconsistent statements made by PW 6 as evidenced by PW 12. PW 6 made 4 material inconsistent statements that directly affect the location and reliability of PW 6’s testimony as well as the Accused’s alleged involvement in the criminality: “It is fact that the witness Shofiuddin Molla (p.w-6) didn’t told me at the time of his statement recording that, Adv. Zohiruddin or his election symbol was ‘Boat’ and on the other hand The candidate of the election symbol was professor Golam Azam or they work for the election of Adv. Zohiruddin on on the contrary, the then leader of Islami Chatro Shongo Abdul Quader Molla work for the symbol or he knew Abdul Quader Molla or they have started training for the liberation war at their village……It is fact that the witness Shofiuddin Molla (PW-6) didn’t told me at the time of his statement recording that, they stayed at their village as when pak army attacked over their village as there have fallen land surrounding their village or they saw dead bodies scattered here and there or he hid in a whole under a bush or they were accumulating the villagers and the labor who came for harvesting or later he saw Quader Molla along with his associates, pak army and non- Bengoli Bihari were accumulating the villagers and the labor who came for harvesting in a place or he saw talking Quader Molla with pak army in Urdu but he didn’t listen as he was in far distance… …It is fact that, the witness Shafiuddin Molla (PW-6) didn’t say to me that, he was a voter at that time and he was involved with the politics of Chattro League or all of his family members or his villagers involve with the politics of Awami league or Abdul Quader Molla, leader of Islami Chattra Shangha or he worked in the election campaign on behalf of prof. Ghulam Azam and his election symbol scale or he knew Abdul QuAder Molla thereby…It is fact that, the witness Shofiuddin Molla (PW- 6) didn’t said to me that, he hid in a hole under a bush and he saw that, there was a Rifle in hand of Quader Molla and he also shoot. But this witness said to me that, I saw through the bunch of paddy that Quader Molla shoots over the standing unarmed and innocent Bengali people…”. (PW 12, Cross examination, 23 October and 1 November 2012)
With regards to the testimony of PW 9, it is not clear how he has come to know the information he recalls. He provided no indication that he personally saw the killings of 344 people or state where he was at the time. He provided very little detail in his account, for example, failing to specify the distance between the location of the killings and Rustom Ali’s house. Instead he only provided a generic report of the occurrence. It can therefore reasonably assumed that PW 9’s account is based upon unattributed hearsay.
Furthermore, PW 9 also made a material inconsistent statement as the role of the Accused and his criminal responsibility. This is confirmed by PW 12 during cross-examination: “It is fact that the witness did not say before me that after the occurrence first week of June he went to Lailapur of Asam in India and took training of liberation war or taking the training from there came to Melagor. Taking the arms from Melagor he entered into Bangladesh in the first week of August or on the leadership of Abdul Quader Molla about 700/800 albadar members from Mohammadpur Physical Training Institute along with Biharis they raised pakistani flag. Moreover this witness said such way that about 8/9 hundreds Albadar members in the leadership Quader Molla from Mohammadpur Physical Training Institute took shelter under Razakar members and they wanted to turn Bangladesh into Pakistan again or after that on 31 January we with help of Indian alliance force attacked Mirpur” (PW 12, Cross examination, 4 November 2012).
It is submitted that the allegation that the Accused was present during the commission of offence is brought into question following the testimony of DW 5 (Abltab Uddin Molla). DW 5 is the brother of PW 6 and also an eye-witness to the events in Alubdi: “[A] helicopter started to round from Alobdi to Sarulia. At that time we heard the sound of Heavy firing from Alobdi after the helicopter was gone. […] Probably firing continued in morning from 7.30am to 8.00am on 24 April, 1971. After that, Pak Army entered into the village from three corner with shouting, started shooting and killing everyone in everywhere. These killings continue till 2pm. At that time they also set fire to houses. After 2pm, when Pak Army went away, then Biharis came to our village for looting. There was no civilian with Pak Army. Biharis were only come for looting” (DW 5, Examination in chief, 5 December 2012 )
DW 5 explicitly stated in his testimony that the Accused was not present in Alubdi on 24 April 1971 and was not known to anyone at the village at the time. He testified that the Accused has only been connected to the allegations following the filing of current proceedings: “Quader Molla was not present at the place of occurrence and I did not see him. After this case was filled I heard that Quader Molla was involved with this incident. I never heard his name before that. Not only me but also the whole people of our village never heard the name of Abdul Quader Molla before this case was filed”.
DW 9’s testimony further provides explanation on the apparent inconsistencies and hearsay considerations with regards to PW 9, whom DW 5 stated was not present during the commission of offences: “My Elder brother is Shafiuddin Molla (PW6), then me, then Nasir Uddin Molla and Sharif Uddin Molla. My mother is still alive. Duaripara village is situated to the south-east corner one km away from Alobdi. I knew Amir Hossain Molla of Duaripara. I knew him as he is a neighbor of nearby village to me. From newspaper and TV, I came to know that my elder brother Shafi Uddin Molla and Amir Hossain Molla gave Deposition on behalf of the prosecution. 8-10 days before of Alobdi Village incident, Amir Hossain Molla went to India to join Liberation War (emphasis added)”.
In light of the fact that neither Prosecution witness is able to explain how they were able to identify the Accused at the time, for example, whether they had previous dealings with him so as to be able to recognize him, and in consideration of DW 5’s evidence, it is submitted that the Prosecution has failed to even establish the Accused’s presence beyond a reasonable doubt let alone his involvement as an alleged leader of the Pakistani forces.
Charge 6: Murder and rape as crimes against humanity
The Prosecution relies on the live testimony of PW 3 (Momena Begum), who was present during the commission of offences charged.
The Defence calls into question the reliability of PW 3’s testimony. At the time of the alleged offence, PW 3 was a young child, clearly traumatised by the events she witnesses including the killing of her entire family and rape of her sister. This culminated in a period of insanity for three years (“I was insane for three years after…they tied me by chain”, (PW 3, Cross examination 17 July 2012). Although she admitted to being in hiding during the commission of offence, she provided a number of detailed points as abovementioned. However, PW 3 was unable to state how she was able to see or indeed recall who was present in the house at the time or furthermore, how she knew that the Accused was present. She did not describe the Accused at the time or state that she knew him prior to the offence so as to be able to recognize him. She was further unable to describe the role of the Accused in the alleged incidents. She did not state whether the Accused ordered the killings or rape, aided and abetted in the killings or rape or indeed directly perpetrated the killings. Instead she continuously referred to the generic “they” to describe the alleged perpetrators without elaborating as to whom this included.
It is submitted that PW 3 was unable to identify the Accused as his alleged presence at the commission of offence is entirely based upon hearsay. In examination in chief, PW 3 testified “Kamal Khan who served tea to the freedom fighters told me that Quader Molla killed my parents. My father in law, Akkas Molla also told me the same” (PW 3, Examination in chief, 17 July 2012.) PW 3 thereby admitted that she did not know at the time who committed the offences and was only told at a subsequent date. This is in direct contradiction to her examination in chief wherein she sought to assert that she recognized the Accused at the time. This amounts to no more than hearsay evidence to which the relevant considerations must apply as detailed above.
The Defence further highlights that following her recovery, PW 3 admittedly never reported the atrocities that she witnesses or named the Accused as bearing any criminal responsibility. Given the circumstances in which PW 3 would have witnessed the commission of offences and that she admittedly was told of the Accused’s alleged involvement after the fact, and in light of no further supporting evidence, it is submitted that the Prosecution has failed to prove the Accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Documents of Jallad Khana
The Basis of Charges brought against the Accused is Jallad Khana, which is situated in Mirpur 10, Dhaka.
Regarding the “Jallad Khana” P.W. 11 stated in her deposition dated 7th October 2012 that: “I recorded the statement of the victim Momena Begum, daughter of Shahid Hazrat Ali Laskar and Shahid Amina Begum, wife of Habibur Rahman, of Barordi, Section-12, Block- D, Shahidbag, 24 no lane, Mipur, Thana- Pallabi, DMP, Dhaka. During great Liberation war the address of Momena Begum was Mirpur Section-12, Block- D, Lane-05, House no-21, Dhaka. I recorded her statement sitting at Jolladkhana once upon a time which was familiar as Pump house.” (Emphasis added)
Subsequently she (P.W. 11) confirms it in the Cross Examination dated 16.10.2012 as below:
“Question: Did you submit the ID card with picture of Momena Bagum with the investigation report?Ans: I didn’t submit the ID card with picture with the investigation report. Because there was mentioned the name of Martyred Hazrat Ali Lashkor and mentioned the Momena is his daughter in the registrar of martyred family, Liberation war museum Jalladkhana killing ground and memoir. There were the name and telephone number of Momena but his picture was not there.”
P.W. 12 (I.O.) confirmed in his cross examination that Jallad Khana is the key document of the investigating officer. 0n 22.10.2012 at the time of cross examination P.W. 12 stated that: “Martyr Pallob @ Tuntuni was a student of Mirpur Bangla College. The family of Pallob lived at house- 8, Block-B, Road- 8, Section- 11, Lane- 7, at Mirpur. Shahid Pallob had his 5 brothers and they lived with their parents together. I examined Shahera, sister in Law (brother’s wife) of Pallob. I didn’t go to Bangla College at Mirpur during my investigation. I didn’t collect any documents during my investigation from Mirpur Bangla College as he was the student of that college. I couldn’t examine anybody who lived beside Pallob’s house in 1971 as the land acquired by the Government. The sister in Law (brother’s wife) of Pallob lived at Road- 4, 11/F, Slum of Taltola in Pollobi during my examining her. I got out from my office at 11.20 to examine her and recorded her statement at Jallad Khana (killing ground).
Question: Did you give any prior notice to Sahera (sister in Law of Pallob)?Answer: No, I didn’t: Because there is a list of martyrs at the Jalladkhana memoirs. I requested Mr. Nazir, the in charge of Jalladkahana memoirs for getting her to appear for examination and I recorded the statement thereby. I don’t know when the list of martyrs in Jalladkhana was saved, but that Jalladkhana memoir was inaugurated at 2007.” (Emphasis added)
Sahera who was prosecution witness, later on she gave her deposition before the Hon’ble Tribunal as D.W.-4 on 02.12.2012. after deposition when she was cross examined by the prosecution. The trend of prosecution’s cross examination confirmed that Jallad Khana is an important factor of the investigation. “It’s not fact that, I talked with two investigating officer Abdur Razzaq Khan and Monowar Begom at Jallad Khana in presence of Nasir Uddin. ... It is not fact that, about a year ago I told the investigation officer Monowara Begom and Abdur Razzaq Khan in presence of Nasir Uddin that, the killing of Pollob was taken place with the order of Quader Molla. ... I went to the pump house for 2 or 3 times. It was a long ago, may be 4 or 5 years back, though the people wanted to know about the killing of Pollob. I did not go to the pump house for any other purpose……”
On 13.12.2012 a report has been published on Daily Naya Digato with the Heading of “Charge against Abdul Quader Mollah and what is in the document of Executor’s house (Jalladkhana)” The contents of the News is stated below:
Date: 13th December 2012.
Trial is going on against Assistant General Secretary of Jamat-e-Islami Abdul Quader Mollah on the charge of crime against humanity in ICT BD-2. Among charges which have been brought against him, killing of Journelist Khadakar Abu Taleb, killing of Pallab and Hazrat Ali are prominent.
Son of Khandakar Abu Taleb, Khandakar Abul Ahsan has given testimony against Abdul Quader Mollah in Tribunal-2. Sister in law of Pallab Saira Begum who is prosecution witness, has given testimony in favor of Abdul Quader Molah about killing of Pallab in Tribunal.
Interveiw of martyr’s family members, main copy of written statement of them, audio and video statement about killing of Khandakar Abu Taleb, Pallab and Hazrat Ali and many others are preserved with the authority of Liberation War Museam. Duplicate copies of written statements are in the Museam of Executor House (Jalladkhana). Biharis killed Bengalis in the pump house situated at Mirpur-10 during 1971. After killing, their dead bodies were thrown into tank of water and ditch(small pond). This slaughter land was discovered during the decade of 1990s and a lot of skeletons of martyrs were found there. Afterwards that pump house was made Executor’s House (Jalladkhana) Musuem. Relatives of the people who were killed in Jalladkhana during 1971, were searched for and after finding them, their interviews were taken and statements were recorded and those documents are preserved to the authority of Liberation War Museam.
About Martyred Journelist Khandakar Abu Taleb, statement of his son Khandakar Abul Ahsan has been recorded. He also has given statement in the Tribunal. Before giving testimony in this Tribunal, the statement of Khandakar Abul Ahsan about killing of his father which is preserved in Liberation War Museam, is as follows: “Pakistani army has made me orphan and closed the way of calling my father as “Baba (father)” since long 36 years. They also made my mother insane and widow. Absence of anyone makes a family helpless which best example is the family of Khandakar Abu Taleb. My father was hardworker, responsible, helpful to other and free-minded. Practise of knowlrdge was his passion. Among my brothers and sisters, his behaviour was more friendly. But after lossing my father, we did not get enough privileges to study more. Our family condition was very bad. During liberation war, I used to send money to my mother and brother-sister by selling leaf of tea. I had not enough dress to wear. I had to study staying in the house of a relative in village for reason of economic miserable condition. My elder brother also endured many sufferings. He maintained our family after liberation war firstly by working in Ganokandho and after that he joined in Daily Observer at 1974. Bearing with huge sufferings, my mother left this world. We are alive thouse economic suffering is not ended. We have nothing to pray anything from anyone. Like all martyred families, our praying to establish the dreamt country of martyred”.
About the killing of Pallab, interview of sister-in-law of Pallab Saira Begum was taken on 6th June 2008. What she said in his interview is in the following: "After vote, arresting and confining was started. I gave vote. At that time, one of my son Faruq was five years old. Speech of Bangabondhu is in my mind. After that we could not stay in our house. For taking shelter, after moving many areas we came back to Dhaka. My brother in law Tutuni left house when we were at Savar because he was freedom fighter. After that he came Savar to us one time but he only said, I am freedom fighter and I can’t stay by sitting. He knew that people of Bihari were searching him. For why, he came out for going India but he was caught by Biharis at Nababpur road. Some of them cut his leg, some of them cut his hand and by this way, they killed him. If I joked with him about his marriage, he told me “I am involved with politics, my marriage will be in good environment”. He acted in a cinema in the name of “Ses Rater tara”. He used to act in drama. Tutuni led in the parade of his college. He told this after coming home. They had to run in that parade tying child with bally. He kept him always smart. There is a wrapper in his body like a poet. He was so good. He always used to move taking my son. Most the time, he used to stay outside of the house. After this long days, water comes in my eyes for him."
About killing of Hazrat Ali Laskar, statement of his daughter Momena Begum was recorded on 28th September 2007 by authority of Liberation War Museam. What she said in her statement about killing of her father is in the following: "In 1971, some Bengali families used to live with Biharis at Kalapani of Mirpur. Some Bengali family left Mirpur after 7th March 1971 because condition of the country was very confusing and dangerous. Some other families had not option to go another place, so they were in Mirpur. Family of Hazrat Ali is one of those family who could not go another place. Hazrat Ali Laskar was a Tailor. His shop was in Mirpur. During leaving the area, all who left Mirpur told Hazrat Ali to go another place but he had no place to go. After starting genocide in the night of 25th March 1971, people of Bihari surrounded the house of Hazrat Ali Lasker at 7:00 am of 26 March and confined him. After some time, they brought his wife, two daughters and child son by confining and killed them, after killing they threw their dead bodies in pond of beside house. Biharis raped his daughter Amena Begum confining her in house and after that they also killed her and threw him in the pond. Older daughter of Momena Begum got rid of from it because he went to her father-in-laws house before two days of this occurrence. It is mentionable here that during killing, wife of Hazrat Ali Laskar was pregnant. After some days, older daughter of Hazrat Ali Lasker was informed it but she could not come home because at that time, condition of Mirpur was not good and was very much dangerous. After liberation war, she did not get anything after coming home. Again she went to her father-in-laws house taking his cut-mind."
Son of Khandakar Abu Taleb, Khandakar Abul Ahsan has given testimony against Abdul Quader Mollah in Tribunal-2. Sister in law of Pallab Saira Begum who is prosecution witness, has given testimony in favor of Abdul Quader Molah about killing of Pallab in Tribunal.
Interveiw of martyr’s family members, main copy of written statement of them, audio and video statement about killing of Khandakar Abu Taleb, Pallab and Hazrat Ali and many others are preserved with the authority of Liberation War Museam. Duplicate copies of written statements are in the Museam of Executor House (Jalladkhana). Biharis killed Bengalis in the pump house situated at Mirpur-10 during 1971. After killing, their dead bodies were thrown into tank of water and ditch(small pond). This slaughter land was discovered during the decade of 1990s and a lot of skeletons of martyrs were found there. Afterwards that pump house was made Executor’s House (Jalladkhana) Musuem. Relatives of the people who were killed in Jalladkhana during 1971, were searched for and after finding them, their interviews were taken and statements were recorded and those documents are preserved to the authority of Liberation War Museam.
About Martyred Journelist Khandakar Abu Taleb, statement of his son Khandakar Abul Ahsan has been recorded. He also has given statement in the Tribunal. Before giving testimony in this Tribunal, the statement of Khandakar Abul Ahsan about killing of his father which is preserved in Liberation War Museam, is as follows: “Pakistani army has made me orphan and closed the way of calling my father as “Baba (father)” since long 36 years. They also made my mother insane and widow. Absence of anyone makes a family helpless which best example is the family of Khandakar Abu Taleb. My father was hardworker, responsible, helpful to other and free-minded. Practise of knowlrdge was his passion. Among my brothers and sisters, his behaviour was more friendly. But after lossing my father, we did not get enough privileges to study more. Our family condition was very bad. During liberation war, I used to send money to my mother and brother-sister by selling leaf of tea. I had not enough dress to wear. I had to study staying in the house of a relative in village for reason of economic miserable condition. My elder brother also endured many sufferings. He maintained our family after liberation war firstly by working in Ganokandho and after that he joined in Daily Observer at 1974. Bearing with huge sufferings, my mother left this world. We are alive thouse economic suffering is not ended. We have nothing to pray anything from anyone. Like all martyred families, our praying to establish the dreamt country of martyred”.
About the killing of Pallab, interview of sister-in-law of Pallab Saira Begum was taken on 6th June 2008. What she said in his interview is in the following: "After vote, arresting and confining was started. I gave vote. At that time, one of my son Faruq was five years old. Speech of Bangabondhu is in my mind. After that we could not stay in our house. For taking shelter, after moving many areas we came back to Dhaka. My brother in law Tutuni left house when we were at Savar because he was freedom fighter. After that he came Savar to us one time but he only said, I am freedom fighter and I can’t stay by sitting. He knew that people of Bihari were searching him. For why, he came out for going India but he was caught by Biharis at Nababpur road. Some of them cut his leg, some of them cut his hand and by this way, they killed him. If I joked with him about his marriage, he told me “I am involved with politics, my marriage will be in good environment”. He acted in a cinema in the name of “Ses Rater tara”. He used to act in drama. Tutuni led in the parade of his college. He told this after coming home. They had to run in that parade tying child with bally. He kept him always smart. There is a wrapper in his body like a poet. He was so good. He always used to move taking my son. Most the time, he used to stay outside of the house. After this long days, water comes in my eyes for him."
About killing of Hazrat Ali Laskar, statement of his daughter Momena Begum was recorded on 28th September 2007 by authority of Liberation War Museam. What she said in her statement about killing of her father is in the following: "In 1971, some Bengali families used to live with Biharis at Kalapani of Mirpur. Some Bengali family left Mirpur after 7th March 1971 because condition of the country was very confusing and dangerous. Some other families had not option to go another place, so they were in Mirpur. Family of Hazrat Ali is one of those family who could not go another place. Hazrat Ali Laskar was a Tailor. His shop was in Mirpur. During leaving the area, all who left Mirpur told Hazrat Ali to go another place but he had no place to go. After starting genocide in the night of 25th March 1971, people of Bihari surrounded the house of Hazrat Ali Lasker at 7:00 am of 26 March and confined him. After some time, they brought his wife, two daughters and child son by confining and killed them, after killing they threw their dead bodies in pond of beside house. Biharis raped his daughter Amena Begum confining her in house and after that they also killed her and threw him in the pond. Older daughter of Momena Begum got rid of from it because he went to her father-in-laws house before two days of this occurrence. It is mentionable here that during killing, wife of Hazrat Ali Laskar was pregnant. After some days, older daughter of Hazrat Ali Lasker was informed it but she could not come home because at that time, condition of Mirpur was not good and was very much dangerous. After liberation war, she did not get anything after coming home. Again she went to her father-in-laws house taking his cut-mind."
Interveiw of martyr’s family members, main copy of written statement of them, audio and video statement about killing of Khandakar Abu Taleb, Pallab and Hazrat Ali and many others are preserved with the authority of Liberation War Museam. Duplicate copies of written statements are in the Museam of Executor House (Jalladkhana). Biharis killed Bengalis in the pump house situated at Mirpur-10 during 1971. After killing, their dead bodies were thrown into tank of water and ditch(small pond). This slaughter land was discovered during the decade of 1990s and a lot of skeletons of martyrs were found there. Afterwards that pump house was made Executor’s House (Jalladkhana) Musuem. Relatives of the people who were killed in Jalladkhana during 1971, were searched for and after finding them, their interviews were taken and statements were recorded and those documents are preserved to the authority of Liberation War Museam.
About Martyred Journelist Khandakar Abu Taleb, statement of his son Khandakar Abul Ahsan has been recorded. He also has given statement in the Tribunal. Before giving testimony in this Tribunal, the statement of Khandakar Abul Ahsan about killing of his father which is preserved in Liberation War Museam, is as follows: “Pakistani army has made me orphan and closed the way of calling my father as “Baba (father)” since long 36 years. They also made my mother insane and widow. Absence of anyone makes a family helpless which best example is the family of Khandakar Abu Taleb. My father was hardworker, responsible, helpful to other and free-minded. Practise of knowlrdge was his passion. Among my brothers and sisters, his behaviour was more friendly. But after lossing my father, we did not get enough privileges to study more. Our family condition was very bad. During liberation war, I used to send money to my mother and brother-sister by selling leaf of tea. I had not enough dress to wear. I had to study staying in the house of a relative in village for reason of economic miserable condition. My elder brother also endured many sufferings. He maintained our family after liberation war firstly by working in Ganokandho and after that he joined in Daily Observer at 1974. Bearing with huge sufferings, my mother left this world. We are alive thouse economic suffering is not ended. We have nothing to pray anything from anyone. Like all martyred families, our praying to establish the dreamt country of martyred”.
About the killing of Pallab, interview of sister-in-law of Pallab Saira Begum was taken on 6th June 2008. What she said in his interview is in the following: "After vote, arresting and confining was started. I gave vote. At that time, one of my son Faruq was five years old. Speech of Bangabondhu is in my mind. After that we could not stay in our house. For taking shelter, after moving many areas we came back to Dhaka. My brother in law Tutuni left house when we were at Savar because he was freedom fighter. After that he came Savar to us one time but he only said, I am freedom fighter and I can’t stay by sitting. He knew that people of Bihari were searching him. For why, he came out for going India but he was caught by Biharis at Nababpur road. Some of them cut his leg, some of them cut his hand and by this way, they killed him. If I joked with him about his marriage, he told me “I am involved with politics, my marriage will be in good environment”. He acted in a cinema in the name of “Ses Rater tara”. He used to act in drama. Tutuni led in the parade of his college. He told this after coming home. They had to run in that parade tying child with bally. He kept him always smart. There is a wrapper in his body like a poet. He was so good. He always used to move taking my son. Most the time, he used to stay outside of the house. After this long days, water comes in my eyes for him."
About killing of Hazrat Ali Laskar, statement of his daughter Momena Begum was recorded on 28th September 2007 by authority of Liberation War Museam. What she said in her statement about killing of her father is in the following: "In 1971, some Bengali families used to live with Biharis at Kalapani of Mirpur. Some Bengali family left Mirpur after 7th March 1971 because condition of the country was very confusing and dangerous. Some other families had not option to go another place, so they were in Mirpur. Family of Hazrat Ali is one of those family who could not go another place. Hazrat Ali Laskar was a Tailor. His shop was in Mirpur. During leaving the area, all who left Mirpur told Hazrat Ali to go another place but he had no place to go. After starting genocide in the night of 25th March 1971, people of Bihari surrounded the house of Hazrat Ali Lasker at 7:00 am of 26 March and confined him. After some time, they brought his wife, two daughters and child son by confining and killed them, after killing they threw their dead bodies in pond of beside house. Biharis raped his daughter Amena Begum confining her in house and after that they also killed her and threw him in the pond. Older daughter of Momena Begum got rid of from it because he went to her father-in-laws house before two days of this occurrence. It is mentionable here that during killing, wife of Hazrat Ali Laskar was pregnant. After some days, older daughter of Hazrat Ali Lasker was informed it but she could not come home because at that time, condition of Mirpur was not good and was very much dangerous. After liberation war, she did not get anything after coming home. Again she went to her father-in-laws house taking his cut-mind."
About Martyred Journelist Khandakar Abu Taleb, statement of his son Khandakar Abul Ahsan has been recorded. He also has given statement in the Tribunal. Before giving testimony in this Tribunal, the statement of Khandakar Abul Ahsan about killing of his father which is preserved in Liberation War Museam, is as follows: “Pakistani army has made me orphan and closed the way of calling my father as “Baba (father)” since long 36 years. They also made my mother insane and widow. Absence of anyone makes a family helpless which best example is the family of Khandakar Abu Taleb. My father was hardworker, responsible, helpful to other and free-minded. Practise of knowlrdge was his passion. Among my brothers and sisters, his behaviour was more friendly. But after lossing my father, we did not get enough privileges to study more. Our family condition was very bad. During liberation war, I used to send money to my mother and brother-sister by selling leaf of tea. I had not enough dress to wear. I had to study staying in the house of a relative in village for reason of economic miserable condition. My elder brother also endured many sufferings. He maintained our family after liberation war firstly by working in Ganokandho and after that he joined in Daily Observer at 1974. Bearing with huge sufferings, my mother left this world. We are alive thouse economic suffering is not ended. We have nothing to pray anything from anyone. Like all martyred families, our praying to establish the dreamt country of martyred”.
About the killing of Pallab, interview of sister-in-law of Pallab Saira Begum was taken on 6th June 2008. What she said in his interview is in the following: "After vote, arresting and confining was started. I gave vote. At that time, one of my son Faruq was five years old. Speech of Bangabondhu is in my mind. After that we could not stay in our house. For taking shelter, after moving many areas we came back to Dhaka. My brother in law Tutuni left house when we were at Savar because he was freedom fighter. After that he came Savar to us one time but he only said, I am freedom fighter and I can’t stay by sitting. He knew that people of Bihari were searching him. For why, he came out for going India but he was caught by Biharis at Nababpur road. Some of them cut his leg, some of them cut his hand and by this way, they killed him. If I joked with him about his marriage, he told me “I am involved with politics, my marriage will be in good environment”. He acted in a cinema in the name of “Ses Rater tara”. He used to act in drama. Tutuni led in the parade of his college. He told this after coming home. They had to run in that parade tying child with bally. He kept him always smart. There is a wrapper in his body like a poet. He was so good. He always used to move taking my son. Most the time, he used to stay outside of the house. After this long days, water comes in my eyes for him."
About killing of Hazrat Ali Laskar, statement of his daughter Momena Begum was recorded on 28th September 2007 by authority of Liberation War Museam. What she said in her statement about killing of her father is in the following: "In 1971, some Bengali families used to live with Biharis at Kalapani of Mirpur. Some Bengali family left Mirpur after 7th March 1971 because condition of the country was very confusing and dangerous. Some other families had not option to go another place, so they were in Mirpur. Family of Hazrat Ali is one of those family who could not go another place. Hazrat Ali Laskar was a Tailor. His shop was in Mirpur. During leaving the area, all who left Mirpur told Hazrat Ali to go another place but he had no place to go. After starting genocide in the night of 25th March 1971, people of Bihari surrounded the house of Hazrat Ali Lasker at 7:00 am of 26 March and confined him. After some time, they brought his wife, two daughters and child son by confining and killed them, after killing they threw their dead bodies in pond of beside house. Biharis raped his daughter Amena Begum confining her in house and after that they also killed her and threw him in the pond. Older daughter of Momena Begum got rid of from it because he went to her father-in-laws house before two days of this occurrence. It is mentionable here that during killing, wife of Hazrat Ali Laskar was pregnant. After some days, older daughter of Hazrat Ali Lasker was informed it but she could not come home because at that time, condition of Mirpur was not good and was very much dangerous. After liberation war, she did not get anything after coming home. Again she went to her father-in-laws house taking his cut-mind."
About the killing of Pallab, interview of sister-in-law of Pallab Saira Begum was taken on 6th June 2008. What she said in his interview is in the following: "After vote, arresting and confining was started. I gave vote. At that time, one of my son Faruq was five years old. Speech of Bangabondhu is in my mind. After that we could not stay in our house. For taking shelter, after moving many areas we came back to Dhaka. My brother in law Tutuni left house when we were at Savar because he was freedom fighter. After that he came Savar to us one time but he only said, I am freedom fighter and I can’t stay by sitting. He knew that people of Bihari were searching him. For why, he came out for going India but he was caught by Biharis at Nababpur road. Some of them cut his leg, some of them cut his hand and by this way, they killed him. If I joked with him about his marriage, he told me “I am involved with politics, my marriage will be in good environment”. He acted in a cinema in the name of “Ses Rater tara”. He used to act in drama. Tutuni led in the parade of his college. He told this after coming home. They had to run in that parade tying child with bally. He kept him always smart. There is a wrapper in his body like a poet. He was so good. He always used to move taking my son. Most the time, he used to stay outside of the house. After this long days, water comes in my eyes for him."
About killing of Hazrat Ali Laskar, statement of his daughter Momena Begum was recorded on 28th September 2007 by authority of Liberation War Museam. What she said in her statement about killing of her father is in the following: "In 1971, some Bengali families used to live with Biharis at Kalapani of Mirpur. Some Bengali family left Mirpur after 7th March 1971 because condition of the country was very confusing and dangerous. Some other families had not option to go another place, so they were in Mirpur. Family of Hazrat Ali is one of those family who could not go another place. Hazrat Ali Laskar was a Tailor. His shop was in Mirpur. During leaving the area, all who left Mirpur told Hazrat Ali to go another place but he had no place to go. After starting genocide in the night of 25th March 1971, people of Bihari surrounded the house of Hazrat Ali Lasker at 7:00 am of 26 March and confined him. After some time, they brought his wife, two daughters and child son by confining and killed them, after killing they threw their dead bodies in pond of beside house. Biharis raped his daughter Amena Begum confining her in house and after that they also killed her and threw him in the pond. Older daughter of Momena Begum got rid of from it because he went to her father-in-laws house before two days of this occurrence. It is mentionable here that during killing, wife of Hazrat Ali Laskar was pregnant. After some days, older daughter of Hazrat Ali Lasker was informed it but she could not come home because at that time, condition of Mirpur was not good and was very much dangerous. After liberation war, she did not get anything after coming home. Again she went to her father-in-laws house taking his cut-mind."
About killing of Hazrat Ali Laskar, statement of his daughter Momena Begum was recorded on 28th September 2007 by authority of Liberation War Museam. What she said in her statement about killing of her father is in the following: "In 1971, some Bengali families used to live with Biharis at Kalapani of Mirpur. Some Bengali family left Mirpur after 7th March 1971 because condition of the country was very confusing and dangerous. Some other families had not option to go another place, so they were in Mirpur. Family of Hazrat Ali is one of those family who could not go another place. Hazrat Ali Laskar was a Tailor. His shop was in Mirpur. During leaving the area, all who left Mirpur told Hazrat Ali to go another place but he had no place to go. After starting genocide in the night of 25th March 1971, people of Bihari surrounded the house of Hazrat Ali Lasker at 7:00 am of 26 March and confined him. After some time, they brought his wife, two daughters and child son by confining and killed them, after killing they threw their dead bodies in pond of beside house. Biharis raped his daughter Amena Begum confining her in house and after that they also killed her and threw him in the pond. Older daughter of Momena Begum got rid of from it because he went to her father-in-laws house before two days of this occurrence. It is mentionable here that during killing, wife of Hazrat Ali Laskar was pregnant. After some days, older daughter of Hazrat Ali Lasker was informed it but she could not come home because at that time, condition of Mirpur was not good and was very much dangerous. After liberation war, she did not get anything after coming home. Again she went to her father-in-laws house taking his cut-mind."
Thereafter On 08.01.2013 Defence filed “An application to call for The Registers of Jallad Khana (With the Audio and Video Record) containing statements of 1. Khandakar Abul Ahsan, 2. Momena Begom, 3. Shaira Begom and 4. Kobi Kazi Rozi under section 11(1)(C) of The International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973 read with 46A of International Crimes (Tribunal-2) Rules of Procedure, 2012.
On 14.01.2013 after hearing this application passed an order disposing this application with some observations and to be taken into notice at the time of passing final verdict.
After perusing the statement preserved by the authority of Jallad Khana it’s become clear to us that, at the time of giving deposition P.W.-3 Momena Begom on 17.07.2012, P.W.-4: Kazi Rozi on 24.07.2012 and P.W.-5: Khandakar Abdul Ahsan on 29.07.2012 at the time of giving their deposition attached the name of Mr. Abdul Quader Molla on the other hand they did not state the accused name while the authority recording their statement regarding the specific charges.
Subsequently the statement of Sahera was also preserved in the Jallad Khana, deposition of whom recorded by the tribunal as D.W.-4.
No comments:
Post a Comment