Published : 07 Sep 2026, 09:51 PM
Updated : 16 Sep 2026, 11:48 AM
An initiative has been taken to amend the International Crimes Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure to clarify how property confiscation orders issued in tribunal cases will be implemented.
The tribunal’s Chief Prosecutor Md Aminul Islam told reporters at the prosecution office on Monday that any amendment to the Rules of Procedure would also apply retrospectively to cases involving ousted prime minister Sheikh Hasina and other verdicts that have already been passed.
“If the Rules of Procedure are amended now, the same process will be implemented in those verdicts with retrospective effect. There is no legal problem in that,” he said.
The chief prosecutor said the law and Rules of Procedure allow the tribunal to order the confiscation of property or impose fines, while also providing for compensation to victims’ families.
“But the process by which the confiscation or forfeiture process will be carried out is stated in our domestic law, but it is not clearly stated in our procedure,” he added.
He said he would draw the tribunal’s attention to the issue while presenting arguments in a case before Tribunal-2.
“Future judgments should have clear instructions on this matter,”Aminul said. “If the judgment mentions the provision of selling confiscated property or collecting fines in our existing ‘Public Demand Recovery Act’ or Section 386 of the ‘Criminal Procedure Code’, subject to necessary changes (mutatis mutandis) in the judgment, it will be easier for the government to implement it.”
“We need to amend the relevant rule of the Rules of Procedure and mention detailed provisions there. Then, when the government goes to implement the judgment given by the tribunal, it will be easier for them if they have a clear legal concept.”
Aminul noted that the tribunal judges had already been informed about the initiative to amend the rules.
“I mentioned the issue during the arguments of a case. They agreed with me and advised me to take an initiative in this regard. But due to lack of time, we have not been able to take that initiative so far.”
He also proposed holding a seminar to examine the legal issue and help determine how the rules should be amended.
“If we can discuss the flaws or advantages and disadvantages of the law in detail through a seminar with judges of the two tribunals, then the task of amending the rules will be easy for them.”
He opined that even if the prosecution has not yet been able to take action in this regard due to lack of time, the tribunal itself can also take such an initiative.
