Sunday, February 26, 2012

13 Feb 2011: SQ Chowdhury jail transfer

After the tribunal dealt with the Nizami adjournment applications - and before the hearing relating to Delwar Hossain Sayedee - Ahsanul Huq, the defence lawyer acting for Salauddin Quader Chowdhury told the tribunal that he had gone to Kashimpur jail to visit their client but he could not meet him. He sought a transfer of their client from Kashimpur-2 to any other jail so that they can visit their client frequently. If we fail to consult with our client then it will be difficult for us to represent him that is why the application has been submitted.

Prosecution Haider Ali said that the issue of transfer was a matter for the jailers.

The defence lawyer replied that they felt offended that they had to wait for 2 hours and then they were not gives permission to meet their client. He said that they were all here under the International Crimes Tribunal so there is no matter of the Jail Code or any provision or any law applying. He asid that he had brought books of International crimes from different countries and that he could give the tribunal a copy of these books. He said that if his client was transferred to another jail there would be no reason to be aggrieved. He said that when his client was transferred from Jail-1 to Jail-2, he did not say anything as he was not prejudiced. He said that the court had full discretion to give order regarding this matter as it was an innocent application. He said that in spite of having an order of the court to consult with his client, the jail authorities wanted various signed documents. He said that the behaviour of the jail authorities was not tolerable and that is why they were seeking an Order for transfer as Tribunal has the sole jurisdiction.

The tribunal chairman Justice Nizamul Huq then passed the following order
‘It appears from the defence submission that behaviour of the authorities in Kashimpur jail-2 was unsatisfactory and when they asked to meet with their client the authorities did not behave properly and that if this application was given, there would be no chance of being prejudiced.

The learned prosecution submitted that all issues relating to the jail should be arranged or provided by the jail authority.

After hearing both sides, we are of the view that accused person should be moved according to the jail authority, so we will not interfere but if there is any violation we will interfere, but now we are not passing an Order, just asked the prosecution to look into the matter so that accused gets proper treatment.
The defence lawyer then asked the tribunal if he could make some arguments relating to his discharge application. Justice Nizamul Huq, the chairman said that they would not hear the discharge petition today but on 22 February 2012.

No comments:

Post a Comment