The visiting US ambassador at-large for war crimes issues, Stephen J Rapp, Wednesday said despite improvements he was still not satisfied with the trial process at the International Crimes Tribunal.
“I am not satisfied. I do have concerns,” he told journalists at a press briefing at the American Centre after winding up his two-day trip.
Admitting that there had been improvements and progress in the trial process, the envoy said he still had concerns over the process and that “further improvement could help ensure that international standards are met.”
Rapp said that as it was a judicial process, it had to be based on facts, had to follow the letter of the law, and had to follow due process. “The judgement should be such that 20 years from now, people can say, ‘We got that right.’”
He recommended that international law be followed in the trial process. “It needs to be a fair process so that it will stand the test of time.”
He cautioned that guilt or innocence should not be determined by polls, by demonstrations on the street, and certainly not by the threat of violence.
On capital punishment, he said: “I am very concerned about the [death] penalty. I think many people want to see the death penalty because of the overall severity of the crimes.
He said there should be individualised determination of the proof against a particular person; the role was of that individual, how cruel the acts were, what they did, and whether the acts justify the death sentence.
Rapp continued that the penalty could only be utilised with the greatest care and as the death penalty cannot be undone, it is important that the penalty be reserved only for cases where proof is overwhelming and not just based on linkages of evidence between the crime scenes and accused.
However, he lauded Bangladesh for trying the perpetrators of atrocities from 1971. “I am here because I profoundly respect Bangladesh for taking on this responsibility.”
Two tribunals are now holding trials of war crimes suspects, including identified anti-liberation leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami who formed militia forces to assist the Pakistani occupation army during the 1971 Liberation War.
During Wednesday’s series of meetings, Rapp’s statements on the trial process and the four verdicts were not in line with the statements made at the press briefing. He visited the tribunal and held a meeting with the judges, and later, he also met with the law minister.
Earlier on Tuesday, Jamaat sought US assistance in amending war crimes related laws in Bangladesh, while holding a meeting with the envoy. Barrister Abdur Razzak represented Jamaat and led the meeting that continued for around two hours. US Ambassador to Bangladesh Dan W Mozena was also present.
Rapp has made two previous visits to Bangladesh in 2011.
At the ICT
In the afternoon, Rapp said the tribunals were maintaining international standards and that the US was satisfied with the trial process.
He made the observation while addressing a press briefing after holding a view-exchange meeting with the three-member panel of ICT 2.
Rapp said: “The US authority cannot support the post-verdict violence being carried out by the supporters of the war criminals.”
However, he did not provide any further comments on the cases currently under way.
Rapp meets law minister
Wednesday morning the visiting envoy met with Law Minister Shafique Ahmed at his Secretariat office. Rapp led a delegation that included US Ambassador Dan Mozena, among others.
Later, at a briefing, the minister said Rapp expressed his satisfaction over the verdicts given by the tribunals and the overall trial process.
Shafique said: “We informed them about the four verdicts delivered in the last four months. The delegation heard the details and expressed their satisfaction on the verdicts and the trials. They informed us that they had no objection over the verdicts that include the death penalty for war criminals.”
The minister said: “There is no option other than capital punishment for the brutality and mass killings [that took place in 1971]. The delegation heard our stance and said they are also imposing capital punishment for terrorism in their country. So, they did not object to that verdict.
“They said the verdicts were free and fair. There is no controversy regarding those verdicts,” the minister claimed, adding that Rapp was surprised to hear that the defence lawyers had submitted a list of 1,000 witnesses before the tribunal to prove a case was without merit.
