Bergman’s wife resents ICT verdict

Journalist David Bergman’s wife Sara Hossain has resented International Crimes Tribunal’s verdict that convicted him of contempt of court.

In an immediate reaction to Tuesday’s judgment, she said: “This verdict of the tribunal is a serious blow to the spirit of the Liberation War.”

“Liberation War spirit means practice of freedom of thought and tolerance of different opinions. The Constitution acknowledges speaking against anything if there is any difference of opinions.

“Unfortunately, today’s verdict of this court in no way upholds the freedom of speech. Rather it gags (it),” she said.

The ICT-2 Chairman Obaidul Hasan ordered the British national to stand in court for the whole day on Tuesday. He was also fined Tk 5,000, failing to pay which he will have to spend seven days in prison.

The daughter of Gono Forum President Dr Kamal Hossain said journalists present here should raise questions over this issue. The Constitution did not say that journalists could not say or do anything; they will be gagged by the contempt of court law this way, there will be no provision for appeal.

Barrister Hossain asked if determination of ‘everything by the law of the court’ was constitutional or not.

High Court lawyer Abul Kalam Azad moved the court on Feb 19 seeking contempt proceedings against Bergman for his two blog pieces – ‘Azad Judgment Analysis-1, In Absentia Trial and Defence Inadequacy’ and ‘Azad Judgment Analysis-2, Tribunal Assumption' published on Jan 28 last year.

Advocate Sayeed Mizan argued at the hearing on his plea.

Asked about Bergman’s staying in Bangladesh, Hossain said; “It doesn’t fall under the jurisdiction of the tribunal. It’s not their job to look into anyone’s citizenship.”

Sara Hossain

If they wanted to warn that the husband of a Bangladeshi citizen won’t have the right to stay and speak in this country, she would have strong reservations about that

Barrister Hossain said it seemed that there were two types of citizens in the country – those who can marry foreigners who were “protected by shields and swords”. Staying at high echelon, they can do anything they wish. “They don’t face any problem.”

“But those who will question any matter of the government will be attacked.”

Arguing that the prosecution did not level any allegation against Bergman, she said: “The court has delivered a verdict. But on what basis has the court given this judgment?

She said the tribunal had given the verdict on the petition of a ‘third party’ and questioned ‘their identity’.

“Who is that third party? Who have sent them here? Why have they come here? Why aren’t you asking these questions?” she said to reporters.

A journalist asked her if the right to free speech meant distortion of the Liberation War history. Sara Hossain said: “It’s not the question of 3 million or 300,000 or of distortion of history. Many who questioned genuineness of the figure of the killed in the Liberation War -- 3 million -- could not be reached.”

“Human Rights Watch has been sued but the verdict has not been delivered. Has this verdict (on Bergman) been given as he is easily reachable?”

When another journalist asked her if she had her doubts about the figure of three million, she said: “...I don’t understand why it will be an offence if anyone cites quotes someone else in his article.”

“I think if you find the punishment to David Bergman logical, then those, including Harvard professors and Indian journalists, who have written on the matter, should be put on trial,” she said.

Bergman guilty of contempt