Verdict details Jamaat's crimes

The second judgement of the war crimes tribunal of Bangladesh has elaborated further on Jamaat-e-Islami’s complicity to mobilising auxiliary forces during the Liberation War of 1971.

On Tuesday, the three-judge International Crimes Tribunal -2 of Bangladesh sentenced Abdul Quader Molla, an Assistant Secretary General of the Islamist party, to life in prison. He was found guilty in five of the six charges brought against him.

For two charges, the court gave him a life sentence and for three others of complicity the court sentenced him to 15 years in prison that would merge with the life sentence.

However, the tribunal also made a number of observations about Jamaat’s involvement as well as that of its student wing the Islami Chhatra Sangha, as it was called then.

The unanimous judgement states that the people of (then) East Pakistan wholeheartedly supported and took part in the call for a free Bangladesh.

But a small number of Bengalis, Biharis, other pro-Pakistanis, as well as members of a number of different religion-based political parties “particularly Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing Islami Chhatra Sangha, Muslim League, Pakistan Democratic Party, Council Muslim League, Nejam-e-Islami joined and/or collaborated with the Pakistan occupation army to aggressively resist the conception of independent Bangladesh” and most of them “committed and facilitated the commission of atrocities in violation of customary international law in the territory of Bangladesh”.

The judgement then goes on to outline the purpose of the auxiliary forces that the right-wing parties are said to have mobilised. “The Pakistan government and the military set up number of auxiliary forces such as the Razakars, the Al Badar, the Al Shams, the Peace Committee etc essentially to act as a team with the Pakistani occupation army in identifying and eliminating all those who were perceived to be pro-liberation, individuals belonging to minority religious groups especially the Hindus, political groups belonging to Awami League and Bangalee intellectuals and unarmed civilian population of Bangladesh.”

The tribunal then directly links the Islamist party with the auxiliary party leaving little doubt about the party’s complicity. “Jamaat-e-Islami and some other pro-Pakistani political organisations substantially contributed in creating these para-militia forces (auxiliary force) for combating the unarmed Bangalee civilians, in the name of protecting Pakistan.”

The judgement continues, virtually putting Jamaat in the same category as other vigilante groups. “Actions in concert with its local collaborator militias, Razakar, Al Badr and Jamaat-e-Islami and other elements of pro-Pakistani political parties were intended to stamp out Bangalee national liberation movement and to mash the national feeling and aspirations of the Bangalee nation.”

This ends with a quote from the New York Times (Jan 3, 1972). “Al Badar is believed to have been the action section of Jamaat-e-Islami, carefully organised after the Pakistani crackdown last March.”

In discussing the prevailing context of Bangladesh, the judgement reads, “It is quite coherent from the facts of common knowledge involving the backdrop of our war of liberation for the cause of self determination that the Pakistani armed force, in execution of government’s plan and policy in collaboration with the local anti liberation section belonging to [Jamaat-e-Islami] and its student wing [Islami Chhatra Sangha], Muslim League and other pro-Pakistan political parties namely Pakistan Democratic Party, Nejam-e-Islami etc. and auxiliary forces, had to deploy public and private resources.”

The target, as the tribunal says, of such policy and plan was the “unarmed civilian Bengalee population, pro-liberation people, and Hindu community and pursuant to such plan and policy, atrocities were committed to them as a ‘part of a regular pattern basis’ throughout the long nine months of war of liberation.”

Molla, by way of alibi, had presented the court with witnesses who testified that he was at his native village during the crimes and furthermore he had even received training along with 30-40 other freedom fighters.

The tribunal observed in this regard that the defence case did not appear to shake the prosecution case. “Besides, how far the claim of receiving training at own village for joining freedom fight is believable?”

It states that the accused was a president of Islami Chhatra Sangha’s Shahidulla Hall Unit of Dhaka University and prior to that president of the same student wing at Faridpur Rajendra College. “We do not find any rationale to believe that being a potential leader of the student wing of a regimented political organisation Jamaat-e-Islami accused Abdul Quader Molla was inspired to receive such training to join as freedom fighter.”