Supreme Court wants action against incompetent prosecutors involved with Mir Quasem trial

The Supreme Court is upset about the lack of action against incompetent prosecutors involved with the trial of war criminal Mir Quasem Ali.

Senior Correspondentbdnews24.com
Published : 28 August 2016, 10:59 AM
Updated : 28 August 2016, 12:57 PM

Attorney General Mahbubey Alam has said that the Appellate Division has also pulled up the chief prosecutor for 'assigning inefficient prosecutors to conduct the trial’.

While hearing Mir Quasem’s petition to review his death sentence on Sunday, the top appeals bench headed by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha observed that the prosecutors involved with the trial do not 'deserve to be where they are'.

It said the government has not yet informed the top court of any action taken against these prosecutors.

The chief justice said despite assurances by the law minister of action against these prosecutors, the court was not aware of what action has been taken.

Regarding the prosecutors, the attorney general said, “(Mir Quasem) could have been punished in Charge No. 12. Only because of them… because of their incompetence…”

The chief justice said, “This could be motivated. It’s like a drama… one will direct a part, the other another… They made a mockery of the trial.

“Why don’t you assign better prosecutors? Assign the better prosecutors. Is there any problem with their pay?”

Alam answered: “There are better prosecutors. Why they weren’t put on this case is the question.”

Later, the top law officer of the state told bdnews24.com: “The court has observed that the prosecutors who conducted the trial and the chief prosecutor, who assigned them should not be where they are.”

The prosecution had levelled 14 charges of crimes against humanity, committed during the Liberation War, against Mir Quasem, who pumped billions into the Jamaat-e-Islami since the mid-1980s to put it on a firm financial footing in Bangladesh.

An Al-Badr commander in 1971, Mir Quasem was found guilty of wartime atrocities by the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) and was sentenced to death on Nov 2, 2014, for two charges – No. 11 and 12 – in which he was accused of killing eight persons including young freedom fighter ‘Jashim’.

Following his appeal, the Appellate Division on Mar 8 upheld his death penalty on Charge No. 11, but acquitted him from Charge No. 12’s punishment.

The apex court also upheld his 58 years imprisonment sentence on six other charges.

The government-appointed prosecutors run the cases at the ICT. After the tribunal delivers a verdict, the defendants appeal at the Supreme Court.

The attorney general then joins the prosecutors to represent the State.

In Mir Quasem’s case, the prosecution team included Chief Prosecutor Golam Arieff Tipoo, prosecutors Rana Dashgupta, Ziad Al Malum, Sultan Mahmud Simon, Tureen Afroz, Rajia Sultana Begum and Tapas Kanti Bal.

Malum and Simon had conducted witness depositions and cross-examinations. The court mainly expressed displeasure at their work.

The top appeals bench on the sixth day of Mir Quasem’s appeal hearing in February had expressed its displeasure with the work of the ICT investigators and prosecutors in the war crimes cases.

Attorney General Alam on that day told reporters that the court observed that the investigators and the prosecutors were not doing their job properly in Mir Quasem’s and other cases.

The court felt that they were not correctly investigating and prosecuting even though enough money was being spent on them, he said.

“The court was of the opinion that this (Mir Quasem’s) case could have been investigated and prosecuted more efficiently,” Alam had added.

Apart from the courts, the attorney general had himself questioned the skills of the prosecutors and negligence in the investigation on Jamaat’s Nayeb-e-Amir and war criminal Delwar Hossain Sayedee.

Asked whether action will be taken against the prosecutors who reportedly was negligent in their duties, Law Minister Anisul Huq on Sunday told bdnews24.com: “Steps can’t be taken immediately after making a statement.

“There is a process to follow. We are considering the matter. Action will be taken,” he said.