The Supreme Court yesterday lambasted the counsel for condemned war criminal Salauddin Quader Chowdhury for their persistent efforts to establish that the BNP leader had been staying abroad during the War of Independence by placing forged and inconsistent documents and submissions.
“Your submission and document do not match. You have told [the court] lies and to cover up one lie, you are now telling hundreds of lies,” Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha said when counsel Khandaker Mahbub Hossain submitted a duplicate certificate of Punjab University before the court.
Also read: Mujahid, SQ Chy get 15 days
Mahbub, also an adviser to the BNP chief, said that they had submitted defence witnesses’ depositions as affidavit before the International Crimes Tribunal. But the tribunal did not believe those documents since those were not attested by the Bangladesh High Commission in Pakistan.
They had also submitted a testimonial given by a professor of political science department at Punjab University. Yesterday, the defence submitted a certificate claiming it genuine.
Earlier, Salauddin and his witnesses told the tribunal while his counsel placed the same arguments during the appeal hearing that he had been in Pakistan during March 29, 1971–April 20, 1974.
But their claim was dismissed by the courts. The prosecution proved that Salauddin had been present in Chittagong when the incidents took place.
More here: ‘He was very much present in Bangladesh’
At one stage, the chief justice said that the certificate had been issued in 2012 and attested in 2015. He also asked the defence why they had placed the documents during the review hearing stage instead of the appeal hearing.
He said that the chairman of a department or a professor cannot issue a certificate on behalf of a university. Only the university authorities can do that. “The tribunal has analysed the documents the defence had placed and found them forged.”
Though the certificate submitted yesterday stated that Salauddin had secured a second class, the testimonial said that he got 233 marks out of 233, the chief justice mentioned. “These two documents are showing two different scores. Which one should we believe? Besides, if a student wants to get his certificate from a university, he has to apply by himself. But Salauddin is in prison. You [defence lawyer] did not place any document regarding the application,” SK Sinha said.
In response, Mahbub only claimed that the certificate was genuine and urged the court to examine it.
The chief justice said that someone has to bring certificates from abroad through the embassy. “But there is no seal or signature of any embassy officer in the certificate,” he added.
Mahbub replied that they had not informed the high commission fearing that they would not help since the convict was from an opposition party. They had attested the duplicate certificate through the chief of protocol officers of the Pakistan High Commission.
The court said that it was not the proper time to examine any document.
The chief justice said that Salauddin had gone to the international forum to stop the trial. Pakistan is against the trial of the war criminals. From the beginning they have been trying to stop the trials. Even if Salauddin brings an affidavit from the Pakistan prime minister or president, the court would not accept it. “We have serious doubt about it.”
Following the rejection of Salauddin’s review petition, the attorney general told reporters that the convict had submitted forged papers to prove that he was not in the country during the war. “Salauddin himself gave deposition before the tribunal in 2013. But he did not mention anything about the certificate at that time,” Mahbubey Alam said.
“As the Bangladesh High Commission in Pakistan did not sign the affidavit, there is no legal scope of accepting it,” he said. The duplicate certificate also mentioned Salauddin’s academic session as 1971. An academic year cannot be like that, Mahbubey said.
They claimed that Salauddin had taken admission in Dhaka University in 1968 and flew to Pakistan transferring his credits. “I was a student of Dhaka University at that time. There was no semester system. The credit system was introduced after the semester system,” the country’s top law officer said.
“So, passing from a Pakistan university in such a short time was not possible in 1971,” he said.
Salauddin testified at the tribunal as the first defence witness. He also placed two relatives and a school friend. But the defence did not produce any travel or residential documents to show the date of the so-called visit.
On the other hand, the investigation officer submitted a paper clipping of the daily Pakistan dated September 29, 1971 that says the son of Fazlul Quader sustained severe injury and the driver killed when miscreants attacked his car on September 20.
Then deputy inspector general of Special Branch in East Pakistan in a fortnightly report of political situation, prepared on October 2, also mentioned about the injury of Salauddin on September 20 due to the attack by freedom fighters.
Moreover, 14 prosecution witnesses submitted at the tribunal that they had seen Salauddin accompanied by the Pakistan Army and razakars at different villages of the locality and at Goods Hill.
