While the opposition BNP rejects Wednesday's verdict against BNP acting chairman Tarique Rahman and his wife, teaming the case and trial politically motivated, the prosecution maintains that there was no interference in the trial which proceeded at a great speed after a 14-year delay due to stay orders.
The defence lawyers said the convicts will return from the UK soon and file appeals against the judgement. They alleged that the government used the judiciary to deliver a dictated verdict as part of political vengeance.
The party has announced fresh protests against judgement. In July, the BNP and its affiliate bodies conducted rallies, processions, and sit-ins at Dhaka's entry points to fulfil its one-point demand for the resignation of the prime minister ahead of the general election.
The case was filed by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) for amassing illegal wealth of Tk4.81 crore and concealing information about the asset. Both of them were tried in absentia.
The accusations involve incidents from the 2001-06 period when his mother, party’s Chairperson Khaleda Zia, was serving her third term in office.
Tarique was arrested during a crackdown by the military-backed caretaker government in 2007 for the widespread corruption and embezzlement of public money by his Hawa Bhaban cronies. After securing bail from the High Court, he went to the UK on September 11, 2008, and has since been running the party from abroad.
Until Wednesday, Tarique was sentenced in absentia to different jail terms in four cases, including a life term for the August 21 grenade attack plot and 10 years for the Zia Orphanage Trust scandal.
The BNP has categorically rejected all the verdicts.
Not a 'dictated verdict'
ACC lawyer Mosharraf Hossain Kajal said it is not appropriate to question a judgement politically after skipping the court proceedings.
He alleged that the convicts showed disrespect toward the country's laws and courts.
Another senior lawyer who deals with ACC cases, Khurshid Alam Khan said the case had remained pending with the High Court since 2008 due to stay orders.
The ACC took the initiative to resume hearing in the case. “The Attorney General's office or the prosecution did not take any such step. Calling it a dictated verdict is nothing but political rhetoric,” he told the media after the verdict, adding that those who lose a case might not agree with the judgement.
Khurshid Alam also said the High Court ordered a quick trial in the case since it had been pending for 14 years. Later, 42 witnesses testified in one month. “All proceedings, including the proclamation attachment and newspaper announcement, were followed as per the law.
“If the defence does not cross examine a witness, gives a walkover or if there is go goalkeeper in a penalty shootout, then we will certainly keep producing witnesses.”
Senior politicians of the ruling party also faced convictions and court proceedings during the current government, he said, giving examples of Haji Mohammad Salim, Abdur Rahman Bodi and Mofazzal Hossain Chowdhury Maya—all AL lawmakers.
When Abdur Rahman was sentenced to three years in jail in a similar case filed during the 1/11 government, he was a sitting member of parliament. The ACC also filed an appeal against his acquittal under another section of the law.
Haji Salim's counsels argued that the case was politically motivated, but the ACC took due steps. “Similarly, we appealed against the acquittal of lawmaker Maya.”
Regarding allegations of extra advantage being enjoyed by the ruling party men, Khurshid Alam said: “MP Haji Salim landed in jail after his appeal was rejected. He got bail after 8-10 months.
“The ACC gave the same arguments against Khaleda Zia and Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in the Naiko graft case. No one was spared. The hearing in the Barge-mounted power plant case against Sheikh Hasina was highly contested. Then the court quashed the cases against Sheikh Hasina,” he added.