Ershad acquitted in radar graft case

Jatiya Party chairman and prime ministerial special envoy HM Ershad was acquitted by a Dhaka court on Wednesday in the radar-purchase corruption case. Dhaka Metropolitan Senior Special Judge Md Kamrul Hossain Molla delivered his judgment in the 25-year-old case on Wednesday, saying the prosecution had failed to prove the charges against the former Bangladesh president and two former Air Force chiefs “beyond reasonable doubt”. The case was filed with Cantonment police station against a total of five accused on April 4, 1992, alleging that Ershad had colluded with the others to purchase radars from the USA instead of France while he was in power, causing a loss of Tk64.04 crore to the state exchequer. Prosecutors said the case was weakened by key witnesses failing to depose, and that the Anti-Corruption Commission would now be consulted on whether to appeal the verdict. The court also acquitted former Air Force chiefs Air Vice-Marshal (retd) Sultan Mahmud and Air Vice-Marshal (retd) Mamtaz Uddin Ahmed. Another accused in the case, United Traders’ Director AKM Musa, had been absconding and died during the trial. His death certificate was submitted before the court in November last year. The fifth of the original accused was United Traders owner Shazad Ali, who gave a confessional statement accusing Ershad before he was dropped from the case in 1995 upon the prosecution’s petition.Why acquittalsIn the verdict the court said that prosecution witnesses’ statements did not clarify how the accused had embezzled the state’s money. Major witnesses in the case were former defence secretary MA Anisuzzaman and former minister Altaf Hossain Chowdhury. Their statements were not recorded. “For this reason the prosecution has failed to prove the charge beyond doubt.” The prosecution prayed to drop Shahzad Ali from the case, who gave a confessional statement. As a result the defence did not get the chance to cross-examine him.Ershad silentThe judge took 30 minutes to read out the verdict in a jam-packed courtroom where lawyers, journalists and a number of leaders of Jatiya Party were present. Ershad, wearing his trademark Safari suit and black sunglasses, had reached the court premises with his party men around 3:30pm. After 15 minutes he entered the courtroom with the party Secretary General Ruhul Amin Howlader. Some party activists were seen chanting slogans outside demanding his acquittal. The 87-year-old former military dictator sat on a chair near the dock. He was quiet and indifferent as the pronouncement of his verdict continued. Most of the time he was staring at the floor with his left hand pressed on the forehead. He did not say a word inside the courtroom or to the media outside. Jatiya Party men present in the courtroom said “Alhamdulliah” in unison as the acquittal was announced. Accused Sultan Mahmud was seen crying after the verdict. He did not answer to questions from journalists, but Mamtaz Uddin said that it was a “total political case.” Ershad’s counsel Sheikh Sirajul Islam said they were very happy with the verdict, while the Anti-Corruption Commission’s counsel Mir Ahmed Ali Salam blamed the acquittal on important witnesses not giving their depositions. “We filed a petition but the court did not accept. We filed a revision petition with the High Court asking for fresh depositions but the Appellate Division told us to resume the argument,” he said. Assistant superintendent of the then Anti-Corruption Bureau Md Ali Haider filed the original case with Cantonment police station against the five accused. Investigation officers Manjur Ahmed and Abdus Sattar Sarker pressed charges against Ershad and the three others on October 27, 1994. The charges were framed by the court on August 12, 1995. The Supreme Court stayed the case until 1998 and so the recording of witness statements only began in 2010, 18 years after the case was filed. Ershad pleaded not guilty in a written statement placed before the court in 2014. The others also entered not guilty pleas. On March 17, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court upheld its previous order to scrap a High Court decision that required completion of all 38 prosecution witness depositions. The trial hence proceeded on the basis of 12 already recorded witness statements.