|
Friday, November 2, 2007
Intelligence after the Journalsits in Northern Bangladesh
BBC Bangla reports today morning that the Bangladesh Intelligence Authority (unnamed) is now gathering information on the journalists from the Northern part of the country. SCOP, the Sromik Kromochari Oikko Parishad (Workers Union) reports that Bangladesh authority has distributed data collection forms and asked the journalists to complete them that contain 26 elements of personal bio data, family background, political affiliation, foreign travel and even information about their in-laws!! It's ridiculous that the Bangladesh Intelligence is now after the journalists. We condemn this step by the army backed government in Bangladesh to intimidate journalists and media outlets. What's next? Listen BBC's audio report (Bangla):
Disruptions in Bangladesh are creating a dangerous void
CAUTIONARY TALE:
Disruptions in Bangladesh are creating a dangerous void
Swapan Dasgupta
Source: The Telegraph
November 2, 2007
In April 1972, while walking aimlessly down Free School Street, a friend and I chanced upon a hawker selling forms that would enable travel between the newly-liberated Bangladesh and India. Being plain bored — it was that waiting period between the end of school and beginning of college — we completed the formalities, secured the necessary endorsements and persuaded our parents that a trip across the border would be educative.
Just four months after the Pakistani army surrendered, Dacca (as it was then spelt) was a city on a permanent high. The turbulence of the past year dominated the conversations at the Dacca University campus. There were chilling stories of Pakistani high-handedness and an equal number of boastful accounts of Mukti Bahini “action”. We heard passionate discussions centred on the role of particular individuals: were they “collaborators” or just frightened souls who had either “obeyed orders” or kept their heads down after the imposition of Martial Law? In the drawing rooms of Gulshan we heard accounts of post-December 16 recriminations against “Biharis” — how an entire family living in the adjoining lane had been killed the previous month and their possessions distributed among Awami League activists.
On the final night of our week-long stay, there was a flurry of excitement when the women of an adjoining house began yelling “dakait” (dacoit). The younger brother of our host fished out a gun and rushed out. The next thing we knew was that a crowd had collected around a frightened man. They began hitting him with lathis and metal pipes. Soon someone exclaimed “razakar” and the intensity of the assault increased. In about 15 minutes, the assailant was dead.
The incident left us shaken. Was the dead man truly a razakar — a member of a vigilante squad promoted by the Pakistan army to safeguard East Pakistan from the secessionists? Our hosts couldn’t be sure. They assured us, however, that these were just the type of riff-raff who had been recruited and issued uniforms by the Pakistani authorities to terrorize people into submission.
There was no mistaking the visceral hatred of the average Bangladeshi for the collaborators, particularly the lumpen razakars. After liberation, many razakars were killed either by the victorious Mukti Bahini or by local people; some, particularly the Urdu-speaking ones, fled to the new refugee camps in Mirpur; and others tried to worm their way back into society.
The initial ferocity of post-liberation recriminations in Bangladesh was understandable, given the bestiality of the Pakistan army after March 25, 1971. After the December 16 surrender, some 92,000 Pakistani soldiers were sent to prisoner-of-war camps across India. Despite their inglorious record, the soldiers were treated with dignity and released after the Simla Accord.
Initial noises about establishing a war crimes tribunal notwithstanding, no action was taken by either India or Bangladesh against soldiers. In 1973, those soldiers from East Pakistan, like Hossain Mohammed Ershad, who had remained loyal to the Pakistan army during the war of liberation, were allowed to make a seamless transition into the new Bangladesh army. The consequences were ominous.
The civilian collaborators fell into two broad categories: the razakar rabble and the Bengali-speaking ideological upholders of Pakistan. On January 24, 1971, the Bangladesh government promulgated a special tribunal order that led to the arrest of nearly 37,000 collaborators. The bulk of them comprised razakars and members of peace committees promoted by the Martial Law authority, but a significant minority included members of the Al Badr group which waged its own distinctive ideological war for upholding Pakistan. The Al Badr’s most notorious act was the identification, arrest and massacre of anti-Pakistan intellectuals in the final days of East Pakistan.
On April 18, 1973, the government stripped Golam Azam, the head of the East Pakistan wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami and the most notorious of the ideological collaborators, and a few others of their citizenship. Although Azam had left for West Pakistan in late-November 1971 and, therefore, wasn’t in Dacca at the time of liberation, the act was deeply symbolic.
In 1974, as part of the infant state’s attempts at national reconciliation, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman announced an amnesty that led to the release of 26,000 erstwhile collaborators. A grey area surrounded the remaining 11,000, which included Azam’s right-hand man, Motiur Rahman Nizami (“Moitta Rajakar”), the head of Al Badr, and Abbas Ali Khan, both stalwarts of the Jamaat. On December 31, 1975, the military government, which organized the ouster of the Mujib regime, rescinded the act governing collaborators. Since then, the entire Jamaat top brass, including Azam and Nizami, have returned to active politics and even become ministers in a government headed by Khaleda Zia.
I returned to Dhaka earlier this week to discover that interest in the razakars remain as potent after a gap of 35 years. Last week, Bangladeshi nationalists were incensed over a remark by the secretary-geeral of the local Jamaat-e-Islami, General Ali Ahsan Mohammed Mojaheed, that there were no war criminals in Bangladesh. Mojaheed was the president of the Jamaat’s Islami Chhatra Sangha in 1971. Adding fuel to the fire, the former Is- lami bank chairman and Jamaat sympathizer, Shah Abdul Hannan, described the events of 1971 as a “civil war”, and not a “liberation struggle”.
In suggesting that public opinion in East Pakistan was divided between those who wanted independence and those who preferred remaining in a united Pakistan, the Jamaat has sought to make the formation of Bangladesh a contested history. Apart from the implication that the scales were tilted in favour of Bangladesh solely by Indian intervention, the “civil war” theory seeks to marry the legacy of Bangladesh with the Islamic inheritance of Pakistan. The Jamaat does not deny it was in favour of maintaining the unity of Pakistan but insists this was part of a political debate that had nothing to do with a war of liberation.
For the Jamaat, the most important aspect of this intervention is the denial of the bloody events that began with General Tikka Khan’s operations on March 25, 1971. Jamaat supporters have consistently peddled the view of Pakistan’s Hamoodur Rahman commission report that only 26,000 civilians died in the nine-month conflict. In other words, if the claims of “genocide” and the murder of three million people are wildly exaggerated, it follows that accusations of people like Azam, Nizami and others being war criminals are baseless.
The Jamaat’s attempts at acquiring a respectable pedigree shouldn’t be brushed off as just an attempt to rewrite the history books. It is an important pointer to the fact that the organization now has the requisite self-confidence to believe it can emerge as one of the distinctive poles of Bangladesh politics — the other being the Awami League. Organized along the lines of the Hizbollah in Lebanon and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and riding the crest of global Islamism, the Jamaat has systematically infiltrated every wing of the state, but particularly the bureaucracy and military. Hannan, for example, is a former secretary to the government and Azam’s son, Kaifi Azmi, is a mid-ranking officer in the army. Its network of mosques and madarsas is elaborate, and Jamaat leaders enjoy the patronage and protection of Saudi Arabia.
The forcible suspension of politics by the military-backed caretaker government may have given Bangladesh a respite from bouts of mindless disruption, but it is also creating a vacuum. The void may well be filled by Islamist organizations that have different mobilizing strategies. At this rate, the razakars won’t remain history; they are likely to resume their old ways.
Disruptions in Bangladesh are creating a dangerous void
Swapan Dasgupta
Source: The Telegraph
November 2, 2007
In April 1972, while walking aimlessly down Free School Street, a friend and I chanced upon a hawker selling forms that would enable travel between the newly-liberated Bangladesh and India. Being plain bored — it was that waiting period between the end of school and beginning of college — we completed the formalities, secured the necessary endorsements and persuaded our parents that a trip across the border would be educative.
Just four months after the Pakistani army surrendered, Dacca (as it was then spelt) was a city on a permanent high. The turbulence of the past year dominated the conversations at the Dacca University campus. There were chilling stories of Pakistani high-handedness and an equal number of boastful accounts of Mukti Bahini “action”. We heard passionate discussions centred on the role of particular individuals: were they “collaborators” or just frightened souls who had either “obeyed orders” or kept their heads down after the imposition of Martial Law? In the drawing rooms of Gulshan we heard accounts of post-December 16 recriminations against “Biharis” — how an entire family living in the adjoining lane had been killed the previous month and their possessions distributed among Awami League activists.
On the final night of our week-long stay, there was a flurry of excitement when the women of an adjoining house began yelling “dakait” (dacoit). The younger brother of our host fished out a gun and rushed out. The next thing we knew was that a crowd had collected around a frightened man. They began hitting him with lathis and metal pipes. Soon someone exclaimed “razakar” and the intensity of the assault increased. In about 15 minutes, the assailant was dead.
The incident left us shaken. Was the dead man truly a razakar — a member of a vigilante squad promoted by the Pakistan army to safeguard East Pakistan from the secessionists? Our hosts couldn’t be sure. They assured us, however, that these were just the type of riff-raff who had been recruited and issued uniforms by the Pakistani authorities to terrorize people into submission.
There was no mistaking the visceral hatred of the average Bangladeshi for the collaborators, particularly the lumpen razakars. After liberation, many razakars were killed either by the victorious Mukti Bahini or by local people; some, particularly the Urdu-speaking ones, fled to the new refugee camps in Mirpur; and others tried to worm their way back into society.
The initial ferocity of post-liberation recriminations in Bangladesh was understandable, given the bestiality of the Pakistan army after March 25, 1971. After the December 16 surrender, some 92,000 Pakistani soldiers were sent to prisoner-of-war camps across India. Despite their inglorious record, the soldiers were treated with dignity and released after the Simla Accord.
Initial noises about establishing a war crimes tribunal notwithstanding, no action was taken by either India or Bangladesh against soldiers. In 1973, those soldiers from East Pakistan, like Hossain Mohammed Ershad, who had remained loyal to the Pakistan army during the war of liberation, were allowed to make a seamless transition into the new Bangladesh army. The consequences were ominous.
The civilian collaborators fell into two broad categories: the razakar rabble and the Bengali-speaking ideological upholders of Pakistan. On January 24, 1971, the Bangladesh government promulgated a special tribunal order that led to the arrest of nearly 37,000 collaborators. The bulk of them comprised razakars and members of peace committees promoted by the Martial Law authority, but a significant minority included members of the Al Badr group which waged its own distinctive ideological war for upholding Pakistan. The Al Badr’s most notorious act was the identification, arrest and massacre of anti-Pakistan intellectuals in the final days of East Pakistan.
On April 18, 1973, the government stripped Golam Azam, the head of the East Pakistan wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami and the most notorious of the ideological collaborators, and a few others of their citizenship. Although Azam had left for West Pakistan in late-November 1971 and, therefore, wasn’t in Dacca at the time of liberation, the act was deeply symbolic.
In 1974, as part of the infant state’s attempts at national reconciliation, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman announced an amnesty that led to the release of 26,000 erstwhile collaborators. A grey area surrounded the remaining 11,000, which included Azam’s right-hand man, Motiur Rahman Nizami (“Moitta Rajakar”), the head of Al Badr, and Abbas Ali Khan, both stalwarts of the Jamaat. On December 31, 1975, the military government, which organized the ouster of the Mujib regime, rescinded the act governing collaborators. Since then, the entire Jamaat top brass, including Azam and Nizami, have returned to active politics and even become ministers in a government headed by Khaleda Zia.
I returned to Dhaka earlier this week to discover that interest in the razakars remain as potent after a gap of 35 years. Last week, Bangladeshi nationalists were incensed over a remark by the secretary-geeral of the local Jamaat-e-Islami, General Ali Ahsan Mohammed Mojaheed, that there were no war criminals in Bangladesh. Mojaheed was the president of the Jamaat’s Islami Chhatra Sangha in 1971. Adding fuel to the fire, the former Is- lami bank chairman and Jamaat sympathizer, Shah Abdul Hannan, described the events of 1971 as a “civil war”, and not a “liberation struggle”.
In suggesting that public opinion in East Pakistan was divided between those who wanted independence and those who preferred remaining in a united Pakistan, the Jamaat has sought to make the formation of Bangladesh a contested history. Apart from the implication that the scales were tilted in favour of Bangladesh solely by Indian intervention, the “civil war” theory seeks to marry the legacy of Bangladesh with the Islamic inheritance of Pakistan. The Jamaat does not deny it was in favour of maintaining the unity of Pakistan but insists this was part of a political debate that had nothing to do with a war of liberation.
For the Jamaat, the most important aspect of this intervention is the denial of the bloody events that began with General Tikka Khan’s operations on March 25, 1971. Jamaat supporters have consistently peddled the view of Pakistan’s Hamoodur Rahman commission report that only 26,000 civilians died in the nine-month conflict. In other words, if the claims of “genocide” and the murder of three million people are wildly exaggerated, it follows that accusations of people like Azam, Nizami and others being war criminals are baseless.
The Jamaat’s attempts at acquiring a respectable pedigree shouldn’t be brushed off as just an attempt to rewrite the history books. It is an important pointer to the fact that the organization now has the requisite self-confidence to believe it can emerge as one of the distinctive poles of Bangladesh politics — the other being the Awami League. Organized along the lines of the Hizbollah in Lebanon and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and riding the crest of global Islamism, the Jamaat has systematically infiltrated every wing of the state, but particularly the bureaucracy and military. Hannan, for example, is a former secretary to the government and Azam’s son, Kaifi Azmi, is a mid-ranking officer in the army. Its network of mosques and madarsas is elaborate, and Jamaat leaders enjoy the patronage and protection of Saudi Arabia.
The forcible suspension of politics by the military-backed caretaker government may have given Bangladesh a respite from bouts of mindless disruption, but it is also creating a vacuum. The void may well be filled by Islamist organizations that have different mobilizing strategies. At this rate, the razakars won’t remain history; they are likely to resume their old ways.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
KENNEDY Calls for Release of Bangladeshi Professors & Students
KENNEDY CALLS FOR RELEASE OF
BANGLADESHI PROFESSORS & STUDENTS
News Release
U.S. Senator Condemns Torture
By A Special Correspondent
(Washington, D.C.) In a forceful letter addressed to Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed, Chief Adviser to the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh, United States Senator Edward Kennedy, expressed his “deep concern about twelve prominent intellectuals from Dhaka and Rajshahi University who have been detained without charges under the authority of the Director General of Forces Intelligence since August.”
Kennedy stated that he was “especially troubled by accusations that they have been tortured.” The U.S. Senator, brother of the late President John F. Kennedy, has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration’s war policies in Iraq and the holding of detainees at Guantanamo.
With regard to Bangladesh, Kennedy argued that “holding these twelve men without charge and for political reasons is a major assault on the integrity and independence of the academic community of your nation and calls into question your government’s commitment to human rights and the rule of law...It is wrong for any government to detain individuals for political reasons, and to deny them access for extended periods to attorneys, family members, and medical care.” Kennedy called on the “government to release these intellectuals and students who have been detained for political reasons.”
Kennedy’s letter was addressed to the Bangladesh government through Humayun Kabir, Bangladesh’s Ambassador to the United States. In an attachment to the letter Senator Kennedy listed the individual names of the twelve detained professors and their university affiliations. A facsimile of the full letter is attached to this article. It was leaked to the press by a Washington source who gained access to the confidential correspondence.
BANGLADESHI PROFESSORS & STUDENTS
News Release
U.S. Senator Condemns Torture
By A Special Correspondent
(Washington, D.C.) In a forceful letter addressed to Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed, Chief Adviser to the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh, United States Senator Edward Kennedy, expressed his “deep concern about twelve prominent intellectuals from Dhaka and Rajshahi University who have been detained without charges under the authority of the Director General of Forces Intelligence since August.”
Kennedy stated that he was “especially troubled by accusations that they have been tortured.” The U.S. Senator, brother of the late President John F. Kennedy, has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration’s war policies in Iraq and the holding of detainees at Guantanamo.
With regard to Bangladesh, Kennedy argued that “holding these twelve men without charge and for political reasons is a major assault on the integrity and independence of the academic community of your nation and calls into question your government’s commitment to human rights and the rule of law...It is wrong for any government to detain individuals for political reasons, and to deny them access for extended periods to attorneys, family members, and medical care.” Kennedy called on the “government to release these intellectuals and students who have been detained for political reasons.”
Kennedy’s letter was addressed to the Bangladesh government through Humayun Kabir, Bangladesh’s Ambassador to the United States. In an attachment to the letter Senator Kennedy listed the individual names of the twelve detained professors and their university affiliations. A facsimile of the full letter is attached to this article. It was leaked to the press by a Washington source who gained access to the confidential correspondence.
_________________________________
Deshi Voice salutes Senator Kennedy
যুদ্ধাপরাধ নিয়ে ড: ফখরুদ্দীনের দ্বন্দ্ব?
(সচলায়তনে প্রকাশিত)
বাংলাদেশ সরকারের প্রধান উপদেস্টা ড: ফখরুদ্দীন আহমেদ যুদ্ধাপরাধীদের চিহ্নিত করার উপায় নিয়ে বেশ উদ্বিগ্ন।? আজকে বিডি নিউজে দেখলাম,
এই দেশে যাদের জন্ম আর এদেশের জন্ম নিয়ে যাদের মনে কোন সন্দেহ আর দ্বন্দ্ব নেই, তাদের মনে যুদ্ধাপরাধ, মুক্তিযুদ্ধ আর স্বাধীনতা নিয়েও কোন সন্দেহ বসবাস করে না। যুদ্ধাপরাধীদের বিচার নিয়ে দেশীভয়েসে প্রকাশিত ড: আবদুল মোমেনের লেখা পড়ার জন্য ড: ফখরুদ্দীনকে আহবান জানাই। তাকে বেলজিয়াম প্রবাসী মুক্তিযুদ্ধ গবেষক ব্যরিস্টার জিয়াউদ্দীন আহমেদের জাস্টিস আফটার জেনোসাইড লেখাটা পড়তেও আহবান জানাব। কিন্তু যে জেনেও জানতে চায় না বুঝতে চায় না, তাকে কোন লেখা দিয়ে তিরিশ লাখ প্রাণের মূল্য বুঝানো যাবে?
বাংলাদেশ সরকারের প্রধান উপদেস্টা ড: ফখরুদ্দীন আহমেদ যুদ্ধাপরাধীদের চিহ্নিত করার উপায় নিয়ে বেশ উদ্বিগ্ন।? আজকে বিডি নিউজে দেখলাম,
ঢাকা, অক্টোবর ৩১ (বিডিনিউজ টুয়েন্টিফোর ডটকম)- যুদ্ধাপরাধীদের নির্বাচনে অংশ গ্রহণ সম্পূর্ণ অনভিপ্রেত বলে মন্তব্য করেছেন প্রধান উপদেষ্টা ফখরুদ্দীন আহমদ। বুধবার বিকালে নিজ কার্যালয়ে বিভিন্ন সংবাদ মাধ্যমের সম্পাদকের সঙ্গে বৈঠকে তিনি বলেছেন, "যুদ্ধাপরাধীদের নির্বাচনে অংশ গ্রহণ সম্পূর্ণ অনভিপ্রেত। কিন্তু কে বা কারা যুদ্ধাপরাধী, তা কি ভাবে নির্ণয় হবে।না, হান্নান-মুজাহিদ এদেশের স্বাধীনতা, মুক্তিযুদ্ধ নিয়ে যে কটাক্ষ করল, অস্বীকার করল তা নিযে তার কোন মন্তব্য নেই। দেশে প্রতিবাদ ও প্রতিরোধের ঝড় চলছে, তা নিয়েও তার কোন বক্তব্য নেই। যুদ্ধাপরাধীদের বিচার নিয়ে তার সরকারের কি কোন উদ্যোগ আছে? হাজার হাজার কোটি টাকা যারা পাচার করেছে তাদেরকে জেলের বাইরে রাখার জন্য তো উদ্যোগের কোন অভাব দেখি না। তার আশংকা কিভাবে যুদ্ধাপরাধীদেরকে সনাক্ত করা হবে তা নিয়ে? সেই দায়িত্ব যারা মুক্তিযোদ্ধা, আইনবিদ আর স্বজনহারা তাদের জন্য রেখে দিলে হয় না? হায়রে অভাগা বাংলাদেশ!!! যাদের রক্তের বিনিময়ে এদেশে স্বাধীনতার সূর্য জ্বলল তাদেরকে অস্বীকার করতে কতো ছলাকলা? নিমকহারামিরও একটা মাত্রা থাকে। এই দেশে কোন কিছুতে কোন মাত্রা নেই।
এই দেশে যাদের জন্ম আর এদেশের জন্ম নিয়ে যাদের মনে কোন সন্দেহ আর দ্বন্দ্ব নেই, তাদের মনে যুদ্ধাপরাধ, মুক্তিযুদ্ধ আর স্বাধীনতা নিয়েও কোন সন্দেহ বসবাস করে না। যুদ্ধাপরাধীদের বিচার নিয়ে দেশীভয়েসে প্রকাশিত ড: আবদুল মোমেনের লেখা পড়ার জন্য ড: ফখরুদ্দীনকে আহবান জানাই। তাকে বেলজিয়াম প্রবাসী মুক্তিযুদ্ধ গবেষক ব্যরিস্টার জিয়াউদ্দীন আহমেদের জাস্টিস আফটার জেনোসাইড লেখাটা পড়তেও আহবান জানাব। কিন্তু যে জেনেও জানতে চায় না বুঝতে চায় না, তাকে কোন লেখা দিয়ে তিরিশ লাখ প্রাণের মূল্য বুঝানো যাবে?
Mojaheed's claim on war criminals
Mojaheed's claim on war criminals a blatant lie
Says war crime expert Dr Hasan
Staff Correspondent
Source: Daily Star
October 28, 2007
Dr MA Hasan, an expert on war crimes during the Liberation War in 1971, yesterday came down heavily on Jamaat leader Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed's statement regarding the existence of war criminals in Bangladesh and termed it a blatant lie.
"We have strong evidence and documents against the people who were involved in war crimes during the Liberation War and what is needed now to bring the culprits to justice is an initiative," said Dr Hasan, convenor of War Crimes Fact Finding Committee, a group investigating war crimes by Pakistani army and their local collaborators in 1971.
"Ali Ahsan Mojaheed as president of Islami Chhatra Sangha in 1971 was in a leading position of Dhaka city Al Badr Bahini, one of the groups involved in killing Bangladeshi intellectuals at the fag end of the war," he said in a statement. The statement went on to say that the Al Badr played the key role in killing innocent intellectuals, professionals and also common people in 1971.
He said the War Crimes Fact Finding Committee investigated the 1971 incidents and found that local collaborators of the Pakistani army were involved in at least 53 types of crimes. The committee also traced at least 920 mass graves where Bengalis were dumped by the Pakistani army and their collaborators. The killings were clearly genocide as Bengalis were eliminated because they were Bengalis and the Hindus were killed because they were Hindus, the statement added.
Dr Hasan said most of the present-day leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami and members of Nezam-e-Islami and Muslim League were collaborators of the Pakistani army in committing war crimes.
"Many of the collaborators had misguided the youths and used them in the gruesome killings of innocent intellectuals," he said.
"Broadly, the collaborators were involved in 17 types of war crimes, 13 types of crimes against humanity and four types of genocides," the statement said.
Dr Hasan referred to the international definition of genocide and said as per the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by resolution 260 (III-A) of the United Nations General Assembly on December 9, 1948, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. The acts are (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting something on the group's condition of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
An investigation by the War Crimes Fact Finding Committee found at least 191 people as Pakistani war criminals who have been accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and mass killing, the statement said. It demanded members of Razakars, Al Badr and Al Shams, who had collaborated in the war crimes, be brought to justice under international laws.
Dr Hasan is also member secretary of the Sector Commanders Forum, a platform of sector commanders of 1971 Liberation War.
He said the forum recently demanded that the Election Commission declare collaborators of 1971 disqualified for election and also to bring all criminals to justice who were involved in war crimes and crimes against humanity in 1971.
Dr Hasan also demanded trial under martial law of those people who fought against the army of this country in 1971.
Says war crime expert Dr Hasan
Staff Correspondent
Source: Daily Star
October 28, 2007
Dr MA Hasan, an expert on war crimes during the Liberation War in 1971, yesterday came down heavily on Jamaat leader Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed's statement regarding the existence of war criminals in Bangladesh and termed it a blatant lie.
"We have strong evidence and documents against the people who were involved in war crimes during the Liberation War and what is needed now to bring the culprits to justice is an initiative," said Dr Hasan, convenor of War Crimes Fact Finding Committee, a group investigating war crimes by Pakistani army and their local collaborators in 1971.
"Ali Ahsan Mojaheed as president of Islami Chhatra Sangha in 1971 was in a leading position of Dhaka city Al Badr Bahini, one of the groups involved in killing Bangladeshi intellectuals at the fag end of the war," he said in a statement. The statement went on to say that the Al Badr played the key role in killing innocent intellectuals, professionals and also common people in 1971.
He said the War Crimes Fact Finding Committee investigated the 1971 incidents and found that local collaborators of the Pakistani army were involved in at least 53 types of crimes. The committee also traced at least 920 mass graves where Bengalis were dumped by the Pakistani army and their collaborators. The killings were clearly genocide as Bengalis were eliminated because they were Bengalis and the Hindus were killed because they were Hindus, the statement added.
Dr Hasan said most of the present-day leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami and members of Nezam-e-Islami and Muslim League were collaborators of the Pakistani army in committing war crimes.
"Many of the collaborators had misguided the youths and used them in the gruesome killings of innocent intellectuals," he said.
"Broadly, the collaborators were involved in 17 types of war crimes, 13 types of crimes against humanity and four types of genocides," the statement said.
Dr Hasan referred to the international definition of genocide and said as per the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by resolution 260 (III-A) of the United Nations General Assembly on December 9, 1948, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. The acts are (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting something on the group's condition of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
An investigation by the War Crimes Fact Finding Committee found at least 191 people as Pakistani war criminals who have been accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and mass killing, the statement said. It demanded members of Razakars, Al Badr and Al Shams, who had collaborated in the war crimes, be brought to justice under international laws.
Dr Hasan is also member secretary of the Sector Commanders Forum, a platform of sector commanders of 1971 Liberation War.
He said the forum recently demanded that the Election Commission declare collaborators of 1971 disqualified for election and also to bring all criminals to justice who were involved in war crimes and crimes against humanity in 1971.
Dr Hasan also demanded trial under martial law of those people who fought against the army of this country in 1971.
Crimes Against Humanity: What Bangladesh Said
It is a rare opportunity to witness Bangladesh Government's official position on crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes and violations of the humanitarian rules. After the military coup of 1975, Bangladesh has sadly let the war criminal Jamatis settle and rehabilitate socially and politically. We're presenting what Bangladesh Ambassador Mohammad Zamir said in the United Nations on June 18, 1998, during the Diplomatic Conference for the establishment of the International Criminal Court that will shed lights on Bangladesh Government's once expressed position on war crime and crimes against humanity.
Bangladesh Ambassador Mohammad Zamir states,
Bangladesh Ambassador Mohammad Zamir states,
"Bangladesh regards the holding of this Diplomatic Conference for the establishment of the ICC as a rare opportunity for the international community to put in place a system of justice which can suitably redress unspeakable crimes of great enormity...Unfortunately, BNP led Bangladesh government actually rewarded war criminal and collaborator Jamatis after 2001 election with ministerial portfolios. Sadly, Jamati Criminals got rewarded instead of being punished. Now these miscreants can even dare to undermine and challenge the freedom fight of 1971 and three million's sacrifice. Now, it is right time to clean up all the messes that the nation has been burdened over the years. If we have to really try the war criminals and collaborators of 1971 right now, Why doesn't the Government initiate the process right now?
Bangladesh approaches this Conference with an unique background since it has on its Statue books vide its Act No. XIX of 1973. a comprehensive law for the trial and punishment of crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes and violations of the humanitarian rules contained in the Geneva conventions of 1949 as well as any other crime with international legal implications...
We reiterate that the high standard of international criminal law and justice demand that the crimes to be included in the Statute should be defined with clarity and precision for the sake of deterrence and the integrity of this new process. When the Father of our Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman first gave his historic commitment to try and punish the core crimes on the soil of Bangladesh on January 10, 1972, he viewed the emerging regime of law as part of the very fabric of a new World Dispensation, where individuals would not be able to shelter behind the fecund fictions of theories of the State. It is our hope and belief that this Conference will find fruition of that promise".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)