The counsels of top war crimes accused Motiur Rahman Nizami and one of his sons who were present at the tribunal were supposed to be worried about Nizami’s “sudden illness” at jail early yesterday. However, it appeared to be the reverse – there was no sign of anxiety on their faces; they were relaxed.
After the Dhaka Central Jail authorities informed the International Crimes Tribunal 1 that the accused Jamaat-e-Islami chief could not be brought before it due to illness, the pronouncement of the judgement was further delayed for an indefinite period of time.
Nizami was one of the alleged war criminals who were arrested at the very beginning, when the tribunal had first started functioning back in 2010. But this case has repeatedly been delayed during the trial proceedings.
Even late last year, the case was kept awaiting a verdict. Since the tribunal chairman had retired before delivering the judgement, the tribunal had to rehear the arguments from both sides.
The wait was over when the tribunal announced the verdict date in a war crimes case against Nizami on Monday. Journalists, observers, prosecution and defence lawyers all gathered at the tribunal, ignoring the morning’s rainfall.
Tight security measures were taken at the tribunal area as well as in the capital. Huge numbers of police and BGB personnel were deployed across the country to tackle any possible anarchist actions taken by Jamaat as its activists had carried out violent activities before and after the pronouncement of verdicts against some of their other leaders.
Jamaat had earlier declared that they would call hartals on the every verdict day. But it did not do so for this case, which raised the eyebrows of many. The lack of announcements of shutdowns and Jamaat’s unusual silence since tribunal’s announcement of the verdict date were the main issues of discussion since Monday.
The gossips were there until yesterday morning when the newsmen and others started gathering at the tribunal, either to cover the judgement or to witness the proceedings. Photojournalists were also waiting to take pictures of Nizami’s arrival at the tribunal in the prison van.
But after some unusual delay, at one point information started coming from unconfirmed sources that Nizami might not be produced before the tribunal since he had suddenly fallen ill in prison that morning.
As per the law, the tribunal cannot deliver a verdict in the absence of an accused who is in custody.
The information of his illness surprised journalists, prosecutors and the tribunal staff.
When Nizami’s lawyers started arriving at the tribunal, they looked relieved, as if they had been aware of the matter beforehand.
Tariqul Islam, one of Nizami’s counsels who was entering the tribunal around 10am, said in reply to the questions from few journalists that Nizami had suddenly fallen ill that morning.
He also said the accused had been taken to Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University (BSMMU) from the prison for treatment.
Tariqul added that the tribunal might not deliver the verdict in Nizami’s absence since the accused had been present at the tribunal for each day of the case proceedings.
At the same time, unconfirmed information revealed that the Dhaka Central Jail authorities had sent a letter to the tribunal registrar informing them of Nizami’s illness.
Though none could confirm the matter, it became clear that the letter had really arrived when the three judges of the tribunal sat at the bench at 11am.
The letter stated that Nizami had suddenly fallen sick at 1:20am. The doctors checked his blood pressure again at 8am and announced him “physically unfit” to move.
Before the proceedings began, at 10:10am, Nizami’s son Nazib Momen responded to a Dhaka Tribune question saying, “I have just now heard about my father’s illness from the journalists. I have no idea about the letter from the jail authorities.”
Momen, who is also a lawyer, looked very relaxed. When he was sure about the letter, he told Nizami’s counsels that there was “no way” the verdict would be delivered.
Many defence counsels were seen smiling yesterday, though usually the junior defence counsels arrived at the tribunal on verdict days with grim faces.
Though it was alleged that Nizami would be taken to the BSMMU for treatment, he was still in jail when the tribunal proceedings started at 11am.
The tribunal – comprising of Chairman Justice M Enayetur Rahim and members Justice Jahangir Hossain and Justice Anwarul Haque – asked the conducting prosecutor Mohammad Ali to submit his argument regarding the prison authorities’ letter.
Ali prayed for the delivery of the verdict in Nizami’s absence. However, the prosecutor mentioned that according to a section of the tribunal law, Nizami had to be present at the tribunal at the time of the delivery of the verdict.
Citing another section, he argued that the judges could deliver the verdict using its inherent power.
Mizanul Islam, senior counsel for Nizami, opposed the prosecution’s argument. He stated repeatedly that there was a specific provision which said that judgement cannot be delivered in the absence of the accused who is in jail or in custody.
He also said the provision of exercising the judges’ inherent power would not be applicable in this case as “there is specific law or rules in this regard.”
The judges listened to the arguments and decided not to deliver the verdict in the absence of the accused.
After a short discussion with its members, the tribunal chairman pronounced their decision in open court: “Reviewing the submissions, we do not think it will be logical to deliver the verdict in the absence of the accused.
“So we are not delivering the verdict today. We will ask for a health report of the accused and keep the judgement CAV [case awaiting verdict].”
Shortly after the tribunal’s decision, information was received that Nizami would not be taken to BSMMU since his health had not deteriorated further.
Eventually, he was not taken to any hospital outside the jail and the prison officials said in the afternoon that Nizami’s health had improved but he was being kept under special intensive care.
Freedom Fighter Dr Anwar Hossain, also the former VC of Jahangirnagar University, came to the tribunal to witness the historic judgement of Nizami, who is not only accused of committing crimes against humanity during the 1971 Liberation War but also for the planned killing of intellectuals prior to the birth of Bangladesh on December 16.
Hossain was suspicious about the “sudden illness” of the top war crimes accused and the letter from the prison authorities.
“The letter should be examined and the government has to investigate this issue. We have been waiting for this day for the last seven months and if the accused suddenly falls sick, the authorities could bring him to the tribunal on a stretcher and the verdict could be pronounced,” he said.
During the military-backed caretaker regime, Nizami was arrested on corruption charges. At that time, he was at the BSMMU claiming to be very ill – a matter that become a big topic of discussion. But when he was freed on bail, he came out of the hospital and left the place while waving toward his party supporters from the sunroof of his SUV. It surprised everyone.
Former industries minister Nizami was sentenced to death in the sensational 10-truck arms haul case.