Interim government drops provisions for punishing political organisations over 'genocide'

A draft amendment to the law proposed banning guilty organisations for 10 years

In the initiative to prosecute “genocide-related” to deaths during clashes in the anti-government movement under the International Crimes Tribunal, the interim government has not approved provisions for penalising organisations.

Although the draft amendment proposed banning political parties and their affiliate organisations for 10 years if found guilty of crimes, the relevant provision was excluded when the amendment was approved on Wednesday.

The International Crimes (Tribunals) Amendment Ordinance 2024 was endorsed at the Advisory Council meeting at the Secretariat in the morning.

Later that evening, Law Advisor Asif Nazrul presented detailed information on the matter at a press conference at the Foreign Service Academy.

On Sept 23, during an event at the Judicial Administration Training Institute in the capital, he had announced that they were planning to introduce eight amendments to the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973.

In the latest amendment, Asif Nazrul mentioned a proposal to ban any political party for up to 10 years if it commits a crime under the Act.

Two months later, he explained the advisory council's decision.

"We had included provisions in the amendment to punish organisations. Our proposed amendment stated that if necessary, the tribunal could recommend punishment for an organisation to the appropriate authority.

"However, today's Advisory Council discussions indicated that we do not want to link this justice process with any other matter. If questions arise about banning political parties or organisations, it could unnecessarily bring this law into question. We do not want to create such opportunities. We aim to proceed in a 'polite' and 'neutral' manner, and thus this provision has been removed."

Since there is no parliament at present, the decisions adopted by the interim cabinet will become law upon their publication in the form of a gazette.

According to the Constitution, this ordinance must be approved within a specified time by the next parliament, or it will be nullified.

"PROVISION FOR BANNING PARTIES EXISTS"

The law advisor said the government can decide to ban existing parties or organisations under prevailing laws, if necessary.

"Respecting public opinion and demands, it’s not the case that there is no option left to take such steps (to ban a party). It just won't be included under the 'War Crimes Act.' However, there are other existing laws in the country. If there is political consensus and public demand arises, it can be considered later. This is not something to be incorporated within this law.

"We understand that if the need arises to ban a political party or any organisation for their criminal activities, or if such demands emerge, there are provisions under other laws. The Anti-Terrorism Act, for example, has provisions for this," Asif Nazrul explained.

TRIAL PROCEEDINGS AT ICT FOR DEATHS DURING MASS UPRISING

The law advisor was among the first to speak up about starting trial proceedings for the deaths which occurred during the mass uprising at the ICT, which was formed by the ousted Awami League government in 2010 to try crimes against humanity during the Liberation War.

Meanwhile, charges have already been filed against former premier Sheikh Hasina, several members of her cabinet, the Awami League, and its affiliates, and several other senior journalists.

Charges have also been filed against many senior law-enforcing agency officials, including the former Inspector General of Police. In total, there are at least 56 charges filed under “genocide and crimes against humanity.”

In addition, the ICT has issued arrest warrants for 46 people, including Hasina, her family members and top party leaders.

The tribunal has been reconstituted with the appointment of three new judges after replacing the prosecutors as part of the trial.

WHY DOES THE LAW REQUIRE AMENDMENT?

The law advisor also clarified why the initiative was being taken to amend the ICT Act 1973.

"International human rights organisations, domestic human rights organisations and various other stakeholders had highlighted various shortcomings,” said Asif.

"So, we took the decision to amend it since we wanted to maintain due process to conduct a fair trial."

Claiming that sufficient people have been consulted before taking the initiative, he said: "We had a discussion where two of our advisors - AF Hassan Ariff, and Adilur Rahman Khan were present. We invited 50-60 people including the legal experts, human rights activists and journalists in the country, and they came. We have taken their opinions on the draft.”

"I have sent (the draft) to renowned domestic and foreign lawyers, organisations working on human rights, and to the UN human rights organisations. We have prepared the draft based on all their opinions. Today, that draft was presented for comments at the Advisory Council meeting, and it was accepted."

WHAT ARE THE CHANGES BEING MADE?

While remarking “how many” crucial changes have been made to the law following the approval of the Advisory Council, Asif said: “The definition of crimes against humanity, genocide – have been based on the Rome Statute, to which Bangladesh has been made a party. We have defined it strictly by maintaining international standards.”

“In this law, the accused parties have been given ‘equal opportunities’ in the trial. Compared to the law of 1973, the accused has been given more rights. They can bring any number of witnesses required, they can question the admissibility of any witness.”

“This law has provisions for appointing foreign lawyers, and a provision for observers. International or domestic human rights organisations, whoever wants it, can observe whether this trial is being conducted fairly and acceptably.”

Stating that the scope of appeal has been increased further, the law advisor added that if any party raises a question before the end of the trial - whether this court can continue, or if the court charges someone of contempt - in these two cases, they can go to the Appellate Division to get interim relief.”

Stating that the law has made provisions for “Victim Protection”, Asif said: “We think this is another excellent thing.”

“Another provision of this law is that the tribunal can make audio-visual recordings of the trial if it wishes. If they think it is necessary to publicise it, or parts of it needs to be publicised, they can do it. But in that case, the dignity, right to personal privacy and their rights will be kept in mind.”

While stating that provisions have been made to bring three types of forces from three different organisations under trial, he said: “One is the disciplinary force, the intelligence agency, and the other is the supporting force.”

DEATH PENALTY REMAINS

When asked whether the death penalty will still remain as a punishment, Asif said: “Our country’s law has had the provision of the death penalty for hundreds of years. We have not made any new provisions.”

“Our penal code has a provision for the death penalty for many crimes, and we have not even ratified the international agreements and protocols related to the abolition of the death penalty. Therefore, such demands are not consistent with any legal obligation to abolish the death penalty or our legal culture.”

He also said that the government has already stated this issue in international forums.