The government is likely to file a petition next month to try Jamaat-e-Islami for its crimes against humanity during the 1971 Liberation War. However, the initiative may not yield any result due to absence of punishment in the related law, many said.
Investigations against Jamaat began on August 18 last year for its involvement in crimes through several groups of collaborators formed under the party's leadership. However, the investigation officer and some legal professionals are concerned that there are no punishments meted out in the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act.
The investigators and the prosecution are now dealing with some observations made by the two tribunals about Jamaat – a component of BNP-led 18-party alliance – to prove its crimes as a “criminal organisation” in 1971.
The petition will be filed next month Barrister Tureen Afroz told the Dhaka Tribune. As one of the prosecutors, she said they would pray for a ruling on Jamaat to apologise to the nation for its role in 1971.
Meanwhile, Investigation Officer Motiur Rahman is confused about the last part of the probe report where he has to request for some punishment. He said: “The Act of 1973 does allow me to seek justice but not any specific punishment for any organisation.”
On February 17 last year, parliament passed an amendment empowering the tribunals to hold trial of any organisation for committing crimes against humanity in 1971. The Act, however, does not have any provision of punishment.
When asked, Legal Professional Shahdin Malik said: “It is a problem to make an organisation subject to criminal law as it is not possible to sentence an organisation to death. In this part of trial, we should have been specific. The punishment can be imposition of a ban on an organisation. If we can specify it in the Act, then it will be more appropriate.”
Tureen differs with these arguments. “We can amend the Act anytime, but it is not necessary now.”
She added that in 20(2) of the Act, the tribunal shall award sentence of death or other punishment proportionate to the gravity of the crime as the tribunal sees to be just and proper.
“So the tribunal can give any punishment that they want,” she said.
However, Investigator Motiur said: “By ‘any other punishment’ is not proper for the organisation. So if possible, the government can change this part [of the Act].”
In August this year, the High Court has declared Jamaat’s registration with the Election Commission to be illegal since its party constitution was found to be contradictory with the country’s constitution and election rules.
In many verdicts, the tribunals included some observations about Jamaat. It even suggested that the government bar anti-liberation people from holding key positions in any government, non-government and socio-political organisations.
A tribunal in the verdict against Jamaat guru Ghulam Azam said: “In the interest of establishing a democratic as well as non-communal Bangladesh, we observe that no such anti-liberation people should be allowed to sit at the helm of executives of the government, social or political parties, including government and non-government organisations.”
Meanwhile, sentencing al-Badr Leaders Chowdhury Mueen Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan to death for abducting and killing 18 intellectuals, the tribunal said: “It was Jamaat-e-Islami and its creations, fanatic groups like al-Badr, razakar, al-Shams, and the Peace Committee who took a stance to ‘save Pakistan and Islam’ even if it required the obliteration of pro-liberation nation.”
The two tribunals made almost similar observations in the cases against other top Jamaat Leaders Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed and Muhammad Kamaruzzaman.