Bangladesh violating int’l law in trials against war crimes: Soofi

In a legal workshop organised by Pakistan’s leading legal think-tank, Research Society of International Law (RSIL), at the Marriot Hotel in Karachi, it was concluded that the Bangladesh war crimes trials violate various provisions of international human rights treaties.

RSIL President Ahmer Bilal Soofi speaking on the occasion gave a slide presentation introducing the audience to the legislation enacted in Bangladesh over a period of time under which the present trials are being conducted. These included the Collaborators (Special Tribunals) Order 1972, International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973 (as amended in 2009) and various provisions of the Bangladesh Constitution.

Soofi highlighted that the Tripartite Agreement 1974 was an agreement of non-prosecution and that pursuant to same all prisoners of war were repatriated to Pakistan including the 195 suspects. Therefore, in the spirit of reconciliation embodied in the Tripartite Agreement, Bangladesh, as a state, gave up its right to try war crimes in 1971. As a follow-up, Bangladesh also repealed the 1972 Collaborators Order.

However, the International Crimes (Tribunal) Act was revived in 2009 under which the war crimes tribunals were set up. The said tribunals were granted a separate procedural charter in which there were glaring flaws from a human rights perspective. Soofi read out Sections 19 and 23 of the said Act in which the application of Bangladesh criminal procedure code and evidence law was specifically excluded. He said this was an unprecedented exclusion as never before in recent history had a court or tribunal empowered to grant life sentences or capital punishment dispensed with the criminal procedure law or the law of evidence. He further pointed out that the Bangladesh law created space for introducing hearsay evidence, something unheard of in criminal trials anywhere in the world.

Soofi further stated that targeting one political party and the pro-prosecution bias in the trials had been manifestly apparent so far. He also pointed out that the trial procedure and practice was in direct violation of Articles 9, 6 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a convention to which Bangladesh is also a state party. Therefore, there was an obligation on Bangladesh to comply with the same, he said.

Soofi also shared with the audience international criticism that had been levied against the trials by organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW). He also highlighted the embarrassing episode of leaked telephonic conversations between a sitting judge of the tribunal with a lawyer in Europe.

The workshop was attended by a large number of academics, diplomats, law students, media personnel and eminent members of civil society. Former Ambassador for Pakistan to the UN, Abdullah Hussain Haroon remarked that the affidavit submitted by the Haroon family was tossed aside by the government of Bangladesh despite the fact that one of the accused had been residing in the Haroon family home at the time he allegedly committed the war crimes.

General (R) Ghazi stated that the time had come to get people on-board to act against these violations of international law being committed by Bangladesh. Faisal Vawda, senior PTI leader, affirmed his support for the cause Soofi had highlighted and promised to raise the issue at the relevant international forums. Junaid Ahmed, Chairperson National Management Consultants, commended that Soofi’s efforts to bring this issue to light, particularly the legal aspects which were often under-represented. The Nawab of Junagadh was also present in the workshop.

Soofi, summing up the discussion and responding to the queries, stated that good relations amongst neighbours were important. Further, he asserted that there were legal instruments that bind all neighbours to counter terrorism and abstain from interference in each other’s internal matters. He stated that the purpose of this workshop was to legally assess the serious flaws in the process of prosecution and, notwithstanding their effort to improve relations with Bangladesh, there was nothing wrong in bringing to the notice of the government of Bangladesh the legal concerns that were not only Pakistan’s but also shared by the international community and NGOs.