Early
life
Political
career
War
crimes trial
Charges
Verdict
Reaction
after verdict
Controversies
Death
sentence and execution
Domestic
reaction
International
reaction
Reaction
from supranational bodies
 |
|
Uprising of people at Shahbag, Dhaka,
Bangladesh demanding death penalty of Kader Molla and all other war criminals
who are now being tried before the International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh for
the serious crimes they have committed during the Liberation War of Bangladesh
in 1971. Perpetrators of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity have
NO place in Bangladesh. This is public opinion. BACKGROUND: On 5 February 2013,
International Crimes Tribunal-2 delivered judgment against Kader Molla, who was
accused of rape of minor and at least 350 murders. Tried for his crimes against
humanity, his crimes were proven beyond reasonable doubt, according to the
judgment. However, the Tribunal comprising of Mr Shahinur Islam, Obaidul Hasan
Shahin and Mojibur Rahman awarded Kader Molla life sentence, instead of death
penalty which the accused deserved. People, rejecting this lenient sentence,
has risen, in Dhaka and other cities in Bangladesh.
|
INTERNET SOURCE: http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2013/12/17/why_bangladesh_executed_abdul_quader_molla.html
December
17, 2013
Why Bangladesh Executed
Abdul Quader Molla
International
news outlets have used a selective, biased and misleading approach to describe
the execution of Abdul Quader Molla, a convicted war criminal who was hanged
this month for crimes against humanity, genocide and rape committed during
Bangladesh's War of Liberation in 1971.
Mr.
Molla's execution was carried out on December 12 after he exhausted all appeals
and only after the full bench of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court
heard and eventually rejected his petition for leniency. Mr. Molla was found
guilty, among other things, of killing 344 people in Alubdi village in Mirpur,
a suburb of the Bangladesh capital of Dhaka and of the rape of an 11-year-old
girl. He was widely known as the Butcher of Mirpur because he led the infamous
Al-Badr militia in slaughtering a large number of people, including women and
children.
Mr.
Molla had been tried at the International Crimes Tribunal, Bangladesh (ICT-BD)
for almost three years under the International Crimes Tribunal Act of 1973, and
he was found guilty of the charges against him beyond a reasonable doubt. He
was initially sentenced to life imprisonment but, after appeals by both the
defense and the prosecution, the five-member Appellate Division decided that
the sentence awarded to him was not proportionate to the proven charges against
him.
Some
prominent headlines identified Mr. Molla as an "Islamist leader" or
an "opposition leader." While it is true that Mr. Molla was the
Assistant Secretary General of Jammat-e-Islami, a religion-based political
party in Bangladesh, that does not qualify him to be an "Islamist
leader" in a country in which the vast majority of the population follows
Islam and the preaching of lslamic scholars -- without following the political
ideology propagated by the Jamaat-e-Islami.
Mr.
Molla was a leader of Al-Badr, one of the auxiliary forces that, under the
patronage of Jamaat-e-Islami, collaborated with the occupying Pakistan army and
took a categorical stand against Bangladesh's independence in 1971.
The
tribunals considered the crimes committed by the individuals accused of the
crimes against humanity and did not consider their political affiliations. Mr.
Molla's case in ICT-BD had nothing to do with his political identity. His
connection to the Jamaat-e-Islami is a coincidence as far as the trials are
concerned. Mr. Molla's criminal record from 1971 is well documented nationally
and internationally and now has been validated by the country's highest court.
Throughout
the trial process, international standards of justice have been meticulously
maintained. The tribunals have been fair and impartial and were conducted
entirely in public. The accused's
right to know the charges and evidence and to be presumed innocent until proved
guilty were also upheld. Defense attorneys were given ample time to prepare
their cases and were allowed full cross-examination. They could also appeal
final verdicts.
Uniquely
with the ICT-BD, the defendants could appeal their verdicts to the full bench
of the Appellate Division, the highest court in the land. That was not the case
in the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials, nor was it allowed as part of the
international war crimes trials in Cambodia, the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.
Moreover, the ICT-BD maintains full public transparency in the conduct of its
proceedings. The trials are neither summary nor closed, but are open trials
with full access given to national and international media, relatives of the
victims and the accused, members of diplomatic missions and research
organizations.
The
ICT-BD is committed to justice, the rule of law, human rights and international
humanitarian principles. Nit-picking misses the larger point that the trials
are focused on producing robustly just outcomes. They should be viewed in the
broader context of the international criminal justice system, which inherits
the legacy of, and continues to be enriched by, Nuremburg, Tokyo and other
comparable war crimes trials around the world.
The
war crimes tribunals in Bangladesh are all about justice, not revenge.
Akramul Qader is Bangladesh ambassador to the United
States.
No comments:
Post a Comment