The International Crimes Tribunal will hear today the contempt petition filed against Human Rights Watch for publishing a report on the recent conviction of Jamaat-e-Islami guru Ghulam Azam terming it “deeply flawed.”
In the petition filed on Tuesday, the prosecution identified three opposition parties Human Rights Watch, its Executive Director of Asia Division Brad Adams and Associate of Asia Division Storm Tiv, who is also the writer of the report.
Tribunal Chairman Justice ATM Fazle Kabir Wednesday said: “We have gone through the application. We will hear the matter on Thursday [today].”
The report titled “Bangladesh: Azam Conviction Based on Flawed Proceedings: Analysis Outlines how Fair Trial Rights of Accused Seriously Compromised” was published on August 16. It said: “Human Rights Watch’s concerns about the Azam trial include: judges improperly conducted an investigation on behalf of the prosecution; collusion and bias among prosecutors and judges; failure to take steps to protect defence witnesses; changes in the trial court panel; and lack of evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
The tribunal 1 on July 15 sentenced Ghulam Azam to 90 years’ jail for masterminding war crimes during the 1971 Liberation War. Both prosecution and the defence have filed appeals at the Appellate Division challenging the verdict.
In the contempt petition, the prosecution said there were widespread allegations against the New York-based rights group for publishing “motivated and fabricated” reports in the past, having been driven by various interests.
The prosecution in the petition included some allegations against the rights group that include poor research and inaccuracy, ideologically biasness, unethical fund raising policies and appointing of a Nazi policy supporter like Marc Garlasco as investigator to report on war crimes and crimes against humanity.
However, Tajul Islam, one of the counsels of Ghulam Azam, said the report was “objective” and reflected Jamaat’s view on the tribunal.
Prosecutor Tureen Afroz earlier said what the rights body mentioned in the report was “outrageous.” She said: “This petition will convey message to all human right organisation that everybody should have accountability on his work.”
Another prosecutor Tapos Kanti Bol said since two appeals had been filed over the verdict it was clearly a sub judice matter.
