Friday, 18 October, 2024
After waiting 42 long years with the pain of losing loved ones in brutal killings, the children of the martyrs of 1971 felt some relief when war criminals like Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin were finally brought to justice. But, the anguish of not seeing the sentences of fugitive war criminals being executed still lingers with them.
Now, a recent ruling by the UK Supreme Court has added new pain and a humiliating experience to their suffering, which they find unbearable.
“This verdict is confusing and extremely insulting for the families affected in 1971,” said Tawheed Reza Noor, son of martyred journalist Serajuddin Hossain.
The case against intellectual killer Mueen-Uddin has become a cause of distress for another martyred intellectual’s child Shomi Kaiser as well.
Not only for the children of the martyred families, this verdict has also been seen as insulting to any citizen who supports the ideals of the Liberation War and Bangabandhu, expressed Shomi Kaiser.
Following such a verdict from the British Supreme Court, they have called on the government to take action regarding this case.
Similar demands have been voiced by organisations advocating for the Liberation War and the trial of war criminals.
An international law expert from Bangladesh has commented that the verdict of the UK Supreme Court is regrettable. A leader of the Sector Commanders Forum has urged the government not to remain silent and to take swift action.
On the other hand, a retired judge from the Appellate Division has advised careful consideration and action on this matter.
When asked, Law Minister Anisul Huq told bdnews24.com that the government is taking 'appropriate steps'.
On Jun 20, the UK Supreme Court's verdict brought up again the issue of war criminal Mueen-Uddin, who has been evading death sentence in Bangladesh since fleeing in 1973.
Journalist Serajuddin and writer Shahidullah Kaiser, among 18 martyred intellectuals, were proven to have been murdered, leading to the death sentences of Mueen-Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan by Bangladesh's International Crimes Tribunal, or ICT, in 2013.
Mueen-Uddin has been a fugitive in the UK and obtained British citizenship in 1984 carrying the allegation of intellectual murder.
Recently, this verdict has allowed the war criminal to pursue a libel case against the UK Home Office. Mueen-Uddin's criminal activities, including being labelled as a war criminal, were documented by the ministry.
Eleven years ago, the decision of the International Crimes Tribunal in Dhaka faced 'various criticisms and harsh' comments, which arose as allegations in the libel case he filed.
As a member of Jamaat-e-Islami's associate organisation Al-Badr, Mueen-Uddin was sentenced to death for war crimes and crimes against humanity for the murder of intellectuals.
In 2019, the UK Home Office published a report detailing Mueen-Uddin's criminal offences, which was then shared by the then home secretary Priti Patel on her Twitter handle.
However, claiming innocence and being identified as a 'war criminal' in government documents, Mueen-Uddin filed a libel case against the Home Office in the High Court. After being dismissed twice, he applied to file a case again in the Supreme Court, which on Jun 20 granted him the opportunity to file the case.
Professor Mizanur Rahman, an international law expert, said the UK Supreme Court has deviated from its 'custom and ethical stance' of not commenting on the judgments of courts in other countries through this verdict.
Professor Rahman, who taught at the Department of Law at Dhaka University, said: "It is a good custom of the British courts that they do not issue any orders or judgments against the rulings of courts in any sovereign countries. However, this custom has been broken in this case, which is very regrettable.'
CRITICISMS
Currently serving as director at the Bangladesh Institute of Law and International Affairs, or BILIA, Professor Rahman said, "The comments made by the British Supreme Court in continuing the case against war criminal Mueen-Uddin indicate their own moral defeat, in my view.
“Going against their own committed principles and customs, if they have commented on the judicial system of a sovereign state, it is certainly not acceptable.”
He suspects a 'political motive' behind the decision to issue such a ruling in the Supreme Court after the case was dismissed by the High Court and the Court of Appeal in Britain.
Professor Rahman said, "The High Court and the Court of Appeal in Britain dismissed the case against war criminal Mueen-Uddin at both levels. However, the decision there must be unanimous. Since one person opposed it, it went to the Supreme Court. But it turned out that almost all (judges) in the Supreme Court were saying the same thing. I find it curious, on what basis they took such a decision.
"It was not even a part of their mandate. Why do they need to drag in irrelevant things and create controversy over our war crimes tribunal, make slanted comments. These seem to me matters of politics. There wasn't much legal gain from it."
The former chairman of the National Human Rights Commission added, "We know that those like Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin, those who are supporting them, Jamaat-Shibir, are spending thousands of dollars daily in England, Washington, Brussels just to save war criminals, those accused of war crimes.
"This is not a new game, nothing new. The entire West has now leaned to the right, and this inclination has come here as well."
Highlighting the political reasons for not acknowledging the genocide, he said, "In international law, the definition of genocide, any general student of law here is compelled to say that what happened here was genocide. Now, the question is, those who are raising debates over numbers or various things are contradicting the general definition of international law.
"If you pretend to sleep while awake, just as that sleep cannot be disrupted, similarly, if you decide not to accept the truth and decide that I will never accept it, then it's difficult to explain."
Tawheed Noor, who is also a genocide researcher, criticised the verdict, saying: "Through this verdict, the UK has questioned the International Crimes Tribunal by not seriously considering its verdicts as an independent court, and has made various 'criticisms and harsh comments' about it," he said.
He commented that the UK played a 'biassed' role in favour of the war criminals. "There is no reason to think that the verdict in the UK makes the verdict in Bangladesh insignificant. By not recognising Mueen-Uddin as a 'notorious defendant' guilty since 1971, the UK has politically sheltered him. He managed to stay there by claiming he was not involved with war crimes, which is never justifiable. This also raises questions about the UK's immigration process."
He expressed dissatisfaction with the Bangladesh government's indifference to taking effective measures to bring back Mueen-Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan following the verdict of the International Crimes Tribunal.
Tawheed, as a child of a martyred intellectual family, states: "I believe that the verdict of the British Supreme Court is not acceptable, but rather it questions the verdict of the UK itself. After this verdict, things that should have been properly managed between the two countries did not happen. There needs to be a proper investigation into why this was not done, to identify the weaknesses in facing such issues in the future.
"Any country that has individuals involved in genocide or any international crime should bring them to justice and cooperate in the judicial process, as the UK is committed to doing so.
"The way the UK has handled this matter, they have broken their commitment. It seems that the UK is establishing itself as a state that assists international criminals. Those of us who are committed have no reason to accept this," said Tawheed.
The International Crimes Tribunal also proved the accusation of murdering intellectual Shahidullah Kaiser against Mueen-Uddin. Shahidullah Kaiser was abducted by the Al-Badr forces on Dec 14, 1971, and he has not been found since; his body has never been recovered.
His daughter and actress Shomi believes that the verdict of the UK Supreme Court is an insult to any citizen who supports the Liberation War.
"The pro-Liberation War force is now in power. It (the verdict) is insulting to the ideals of Bangabandhu as well. This matter is much more insulting for the children of the martyred families. Around the world, we have seen war criminals being caught and brought to justice, where such a significant crime against humanity occurred in Bangladesh, which was proven; but then such a verdict came."
Considering this, Shomi, now a vice-president of the business organisation FBCCI, calls for the government to take swift action.
She said, "The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Liberation War Affairs need to work together on this matter. It seems to me that diplomatic negotiations between the UK and Bangladesh should have been done earlier. Establishing this communication between the two countries was essential, as we had been anticipating something like this for several months."
Harun Habib, the secretary general of the Sector Commanders Forum, said, "The British court works with its own sovereignty and the Bangladeshi court works with its own sovereignty. Here, if a court in one country acquits someone and another country's court sentences them, these can be different in each country.
"But where there are allegations of genocide, human rights violations, and a court of the same level as the High Court (ICT) has given this verdict, why and how the British court did what it did. We do not know it. We also do not know how justifiable it is."
WHAT THE GOVT SHOULD DO
Various organisations and institutions, which have been actively involved in the Liberation War and demanding the prosecution of war criminals for a long time, have called for immediate action against the verdict of the UK Supreme Court.
Retired Justice AHM Shamsuddin Choudhury Manik of the Appellate Division said Bangladesh needs to consider carefully before taking steps regarding the verdict concerning war criminal Mueen-Uddin.
He said, “This matter cannot be rushed; we must proceed by conducting thorough deliberation and research. This verdict has demeaned Bangladesh’s judicial system in the eyes of the whole world.
"As a result of this verdict, our justice system may become questionable to people outside the country. Questions will also arise about the credibility of the International Crimes Tribunal.”
Harun Habib stated: “It cannot be said that this order from the British Supreme Court will not create a new controversy against the trials of war criminals in Bangladesh.
"Therefore, the government of Bangladesh, which arranged for the trial of war criminals, cannot ignore the order of the British court.”
Tawheed said: “There is no chance to take this verdict lightly. Our state, starting from the International Crimes Tribunal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Law, must take immediate action.
"The relevant departments of the government must take initiatives. In addition, various platforms supporting the Liberation War must be involved. Additionally, the platforms in the UK that support the Liberation War also need assistance. The International Crimes Strategy Forum has been working on this matter for a long time. The Bangladesh government needs to seek their advice.”
Habib said, “Our appropriate government level should analyse what reactions this order from the UK might provoke. The government must take complete measures without delay so that war criminals and their supporters cannot use this order to create new controversies.
"This is an attempt to bring the judicial activities of Bangladesh's War Crimes Tribunal into a new debate. I don't think the Bangladesh government has any opportunity to remain silent.”
Rayhan Rashid, trustee of the International Crimes Strategy Forum-ICSF, has called on the Bangladesh government to take proper steps in response to the verdict.
On what these initiatives could be, he said, “The government should first seek opinions from senior professionals (legal experts) in the UK. Then steps should be taken accordingly.”
Various organisations supporting the Liberation War also expressed disappointment and deep concern in Dhaka.
The Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee, Projonmo 71 or children of martyrs of the Liberation War, and the Sammilita Sangskritik Jote have called on the government to hire competent lawyers in the UK to fight the libel case against Mueen-Uddin on behalf of the Bangladesh government.
The ICSF lambasted the British Supreme Court’s decision. In a statement on Tuesday, the organisation said it was “shocked and disappointed” by the decision to allow Mueen-Uddin to appeal against the UK Home Office report.
It said the decision was based on “several unadjudicated issues and unfounded claims”.
The ICSF described as “uncalled for” remarks by the UK Supreme Court against Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal which “it has no authority whatsoever to make”.
“This decision by the UKSC undermines decades-long efforts of Bangladesh and her civil society to end impunity by bringing known perpetrators of mass atrocity crimes to justice, betrays the victims and survivors of these crimes, and raises serious questions about the UK judiciary’s commitment to international justice and human rights towards victims of international crimes in faraway lands,” the statement reads.
WHAT THE GOVT WILL DO
Law Minister Anisul said discussions regarding Mueen-Uddin's case have taken place with British High Commissioner Sarah Cooke.
Speaking to bdnews24.com, he said, "The government will take appropriate measures.
"The British High Commissioner came the day before yesterday (Jun 25). We have informed her about the steps the government intends to take."
When asked about what specific actions are being planned, the law minister said: "We will take appropriate measures. However, what steps will be taken will be disclosed after they are implemented."
Officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs mentioned that work is ongoing to determine the legal and diplomatic actions to be taken regarding this matter.
In response to a question about what diplomatic efforts might be involved, Foreign Minister Hasan Mahmud did not reveal any details. He only stated, "I can only say that the law ministry is working on this matter."
Courtesy:bdnews24.com
Comments
After waiting 42 long years with the pain of losing loved ones in brutal killings, the children of the martyrs of 1971 felt some relief when war criminals like Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin were finally brought to justice. But, the anguish of not seeing the sentences of fugitive war criminals being executed still lingers with them.
Now, a recent ruling by the UK Supreme Court has added new pain and a humiliating experience to their suffering, which they find unbearable.
“This verdict is confusing and extremely insulting for the families affected in 1971,” said Tawheed Reza Noor, son of martyred journalist Serajuddin Hossain.
The case against intellectual killer Mueen-Uddin has become a cause of distress for another martyred intellectual’s child Shomi Kaiser as well.
Not only for the children of the martyred families, this verdict has also been seen as insulting to any citizen who supports the ideals of the Liberation War and Bangabandhu, expressed Shomi Kaiser.
Following such a verdict from the British Supreme Court, they have called on the government to take action regarding this case.
Similar demands have been voiced by organisations advocating for the Liberation War and the trial of war criminals.
An international law expert from Bangladesh has commented that the verdict of the UK Supreme Court is regrettable. A leader of the Sector Commanders Forum has urged the government not to remain silent and to take swift action.
On the other hand, a retired judge from the Appellate Division has advised careful consideration and action on this matter.
When asked, Law Minister Anisul Huq told bdnews24.com that the government is taking 'appropriate steps'.
On Jun 20, the UK Supreme Court's verdict brought up again the issue of war criminal Mueen-Uddin, who has been evading death sentence in Bangladesh since fleeing in 1973.
Journalist Serajuddin and writer Shahidullah Kaiser, among 18 martyred intellectuals, were proven to have been murdered, leading to the death sentences of Mueen-Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan by Bangladesh's International Crimes Tribunal, or ICT, in 2013.
Mueen-Uddin has been a fugitive in the UK and obtained British citizenship in 1984 carrying the allegation of intellectual murder.
Recently, this verdict has allowed the war criminal to pursue a libel case against the UK Home Office. Mueen-Uddin's criminal activities, including being labelled as a war criminal, were documented by the ministry.
Eleven years ago, the decision of the International Crimes Tribunal in Dhaka faced 'various criticisms and harsh' comments, which arose as allegations in the libel case he filed.
As a member of Jamaat-e-Islami's associate organisation Al-Badr, Mueen-Uddin was sentenced to death for war crimes and crimes against humanity for the murder of intellectuals.
In 2019, the UK Home Office published a report detailing Mueen-Uddin's criminal offences, which was then shared by the then home secretary Priti Patel on her Twitter handle.
However, claiming innocence and being identified as a 'war criminal' in government documents, Mueen-Uddin filed a libel case against the Home Office in the High Court. After being dismissed twice, he applied to file a case again in the Supreme Court, which on Jun 20 granted him the opportunity to file the case.
Professor Mizanur Rahman, an international law expert, said the UK Supreme Court has deviated from its 'custom and ethical stance' of not commenting on the judgments of courts in other countries through this verdict.
Professor Rahman, who taught at the Department of Law at Dhaka University, said: "It is a good custom of the British courts that they do not issue any orders or judgments against the rulings of courts in any sovereign countries. However, this custom has been broken in this case, which is very regrettable.'
CRITICISMS
Currently serving as director at the Bangladesh Institute of Law and International Affairs, or BILIA, Professor Rahman said, "The comments made by the British Supreme Court in continuing the case against war criminal Mueen-Uddin indicate their own moral defeat, in my view.
“Going against their own committed principles and customs, if they have commented on the judicial system of a sovereign state, it is certainly not acceptable.”
He suspects a 'political motive' behind the decision to issue such a ruling in the Supreme Court after the case was dismissed by the High Court and the Court of Appeal in Britain.
Professor Rahman said, "The High Court and the Court of Appeal in Britain dismissed the case against war criminal Mueen-Uddin at both levels. However, the decision there must be unanimous. Since one person opposed it, it went to the Supreme Court. But it turned out that almost all (judges) in the Supreme Court were saying the same thing. I find it curious, on what basis they took such a decision.
"It was not even a part of their mandate. Why do they need to drag in irrelevant things and create controversy over our war crimes tribunal, make slanted comments. These seem to me matters of politics. There wasn't much legal gain from it."
The former chairman of the National Human Rights Commission added, "We know that those like Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin, those who are supporting them, Jamaat-Shibir, are spending thousands of dollars daily in England, Washington, Brussels just to save war criminals, those accused of war crimes.
"This is not a new game, nothing new. The entire West has now leaned to the right, and this inclination has come here as well."
Highlighting the political reasons for not acknowledging the genocide, he said, "In international law, the definition of genocide, any general student of law here is compelled to say that what happened here was genocide. Now, the question is, those who are raising debates over numbers or various things are contradicting the general definition of international law.
"If you pretend to sleep while awake, just as that sleep cannot be disrupted, similarly, if you decide not to accept the truth and decide that I will never accept it, then it's difficult to explain."
Tawheed Noor, who is also a genocide researcher, criticised the verdict, saying: "Through this verdict, the UK has questioned the International Crimes Tribunal by not seriously considering its verdicts as an independent court, and has made various 'criticisms and harsh comments' about it," he said.
He commented that the UK played a 'biassed' role in favour of the war criminals. "There is no reason to think that the verdict in the UK makes the verdict in Bangladesh insignificant. By not recognising Mueen-Uddin as a 'notorious defendant' guilty since 1971, the UK has politically sheltered him. He managed to stay there by claiming he was not involved with war crimes, which is never justifiable. This also raises questions about the UK's immigration process."
He expressed dissatisfaction with the Bangladesh government's indifference to taking effective measures to bring back Mueen-Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan following the verdict of the International Crimes Tribunal.
Tawheed, as a child of a martyred intellectual family, states: "I believe that the verdict of the British Supreme Court is not acceptable, but rather it questions the verdict of the UK itself. After this verdict, things that should have been properly managed between the two countries did not happen. There needs to be a proper investigation into why this was not done, to identify the weaknesses in facing such issues in the future.
"Any country that has individuals involved in genocide or any international crime should bring them to justice and cooperate in the judicial process, as the UK is committed to doing so.
"The way the UK has handled this matter, they have broken their commitment. It seems that the UK is establishing itself as a state that assists international criminals. Those of us who are committed have no reason to accept this," said Tawheed.
The International Crimes Tribunal also proved the accusation of murdering intellectual Shahidullah Kaiser against Mueen-Uddin. Shahidullah Kaiser was abducted by the Al-Badr forces on Dec 14, 1971, and he has not been found since; his body has never been recovered.
His daughter and actress Shomi believes that the verdict of the UK Supreme Court is an insult to any citizen who supports the Liberation War.
"The pro-Liberation War force is now in power. It (the verdict) is insulting to the ideals of Bangabandhu as well. This matter is much more insulting for the children of the martyred families. Around the world, we have seen war criminals being caught and brought to justice, where such a significant crime against humanity occurred in Bangladesh, which was proven; but then such a verdict came."
Considering this, Shomi, now a vice-president of the business organisation FBCCI, calls for the government to take swift action.
She said, "The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Liberation War Affairs need to work together on this matter. It seems to me that diplomatic negotiations between the UK and Bangladesh should have been done earlier. Establishing this communication between the two countries was essential, as we had been anticipating something like this for several months."
Harun Habib, the secretary general of the Sector Commanders Forum, said, "The British court works with its own sovereignty and the Bangladeshi court works with its own sovereignty. Here, if a court in one country acquits someone and another country's court sentences them, these can be different in each country.
"But where there are allegations of genocide, human rights violations, and a court of the same level as the High Court (ICT) has given this verdict, why and how the British court did what it did. We do not know it. We also do not know how justifiable it is."
WHAT THE GOVT SHOULD DO
Various organisations and institutions, which have been actively involved in the Liberation War and demanding the prosecution of war criminals for a long time, have called for immediate action against the verdict of the UK Supreme Court.
Retired Justice AHM Shamsuddin Choudhury Manik of the Appellate Division said Bangladesh needs to consider carefully before taking steps regarding the verdict concerning war criminal Mueen-Uddin.
He said, “This matter cannot be rushed; we must proceed by conducting thorough deliberation and research. This verdict has demeaned Bangladesh’s judicial system in the eyes of the whole world.
"As a result of this verdict, our justice system may become questionable to people outside the country. Questions will also arise about the credibility of the International Crimes Tribunal.”
Harun Habib stated: “It cannot be said that this order from the British Supreme Court will not create a new controversy against the trials of war criminals in Bangladesh.
"Therefore, the government of Bangladesh, which arranged for the trial of war criminals, cannot ignore the order of the British court.”
Tawheed said: “There is no chance to take this verdict lightly. Our state, starting from the International Crimes Tribunal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Law, must take immediate action.
"The relevant departments of the government must take initiatives. In addition, various platforms supporting the Liberation War must be involved. Additionally, the platforms in the UK that support the Liberation War also need assistance. The International Crimes Strategy Forum has been working on this matter for a long time. The Bangladesh government needs to seek their advice.”
Habib said, “Our appropriate government level should analyse what reactions this order from the UK might provoke. The government must take complete measures without delay so that war criminals and their supporters cannot use this order to create new controversies.
"This is an attempt to bring the judicial activities of Bangladesh's War Crimes Tribunal into a new debate. I don't think the Bangladesh government has any opportunity to remain silent.”
Rayhan Rashid, trustee of the International Crimes Strategy Forum-ICSF, has called on the Bangladesh government to take proper steps in response to the verdict.
On what these initiatives could be, he said, “The government should first seek opinions from senior professionals (legal experts) in the UK. Then steps should be taken accordingly.”
Various organisations supporting the Liberation War also expressed disappointment and deep concern in Dhaka.
The Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee, Projonmo 71 or children of martyrs of the Liberation War, and the Sammilita Sangskritik Jote have called on the government to hire competent lawyers in the UK to fight the libel case against Mueen-Uddin on behalf of the Bangladesh government.
The ICSF lambasted the British Supreme Court’s decision. In a statement on Tuesday, the organisation said it was “shocked and disappointed” by the decision to allow Mueen-Uddin to appeal against the UK Home Office report.
It said the decision was based on “several unadjudicated issues and unfounded claims”.
The ICSF described as “uncalled for” remarks by the UK Supreme Court against Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal which “it has no authority whatsoever to make”.
“This decision by the UKSC undermines decades-long efforts of Bangladesh and her civil society to end impunity by bringing known perpetrators of mass atrocity crimes to justice, betrays the victims and survivors of these crimes, and raises serious questions about the UK judiciary’s commitment to international justice and human rights towards victims of international crimes in faraway lands,” the statement reads.
WHAT THE GOVT WILL DO
Law Minister Anisul said discussions regarding Mueen-Uddin's case have taken place with British High Commissioner Sarah Cooke.
Speaking to bdnews24.com, he said, "The government will take appropriate measures.
"The British High Commissioner came the day before yesterday (Jun 25). We have informed her about the steps the government intends to take."
When asked about what specific actions are being planned, the law minister said: "We will take appropriate measures. However, what steps will be taken will be disclosed after they are implemented."
Officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs mentioned that work is ongoing to determine the legal and diplomatic actions to be taken regarding this matter.
In response to a question about what diplomatic efforts might be involved, Foreign Minister Hasan Mahmud did not reveal any details. He only stated, "I can only say that the law ministry is working on this matter."
Courtesy:bdnews24.com
Comments
