নিজামীর মামলায় সিএভি আদেশ প্রত্যাহার করে অসমাপ্ত যুক্তি উপস্থাপনের সুযোগ চেয়ে আসামী পক্ষের আবেদন গ্রহণ করেনি ট্রাইব্যুনাল

মেহেদী হাসান ১৩/১১/২০১৩
জামায়াতে ইসলামীর আমির মাওলানা মতিউর রহমান নিজামীর বিরুদ্ধে মামলায় সিএভি আদেশ প্রত্যাহার করে অসমাপ্ত  যুক্তি উপস্থাপনের সুযোগ চেয়ে আসামী পক্ষ আবেদন করেছিল। কিন্তু ট্রাইব্যুনাল সে আবেদন গ্রহণ করেননি।

আসামী পক্ষের আইনজীবী তারিকুল ইসলাম আজ বিকাল সাড়ে তিনটার দিকে ট্রাইব্যুনাল রেজিস্ট্রারের কাছে যান রিকল আবেদন নিয়ে। কিন্তু রেজিস্ট্রার তা গ্রহণ করতে অস্বীকার করেন। এরপর তিনি আবেদন নিয়ে আন্তর্জাতিক অপরাধ ট্রাইব্যুনাল (১)  চেয়ারম্যান বিচারপতি এটিএম ফজলে কবির এর চেম্বারে যান। বিচারপতি এটিএম ফজলে কবিরও আবেদন গ্রহণ করতে অস্বীকৃতি জানিয়ে বলেন, যেহেতু  যুক্তি উপস্থাপন সমাপ্ত করে মামলার রায় অপেক্ষমান ঘোষনা করা হয়েছে তাই আপনারা শুধুমাত্র রিভিউ আবেদন করতে পারেন। তাছাড়া আইনে রিকল আবেদনের কোন বিধান নেই।

রিকল আবেদন গ্রহণ না করা বিষয়ে অ্যাডভোকেট তাজুল ইসলাম বলেন, এটা ট্রাইব্যুনালের সহজাত ক্ষমতা। আমরা অতীতে অনেক রিকল আবেদন করেছি। 

IN THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMES TRIBUNAL-1, DHAKA

ICT-BD CASE NO.  3 of  2011

IN THE MATTER OF:

An application under Rule 46A of the International Crimes Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2010 for recall of the Order dated 13^th November 2013 closing the proceedings of the instant case and further to allow the Defence to complete their concluding arguments.

AND

IN THE MATTER OF:

The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka.

                             ..........  Petitioner

-versus –

Motiur Rahman Nizami

                        ............ Opposite Party

AND

IN THE MATTER OF:

Motiur Rahman Nizami, Ameer of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, 505 Elephant Road, Mogbazar, Dhaka 1217.

                                                                   …Accused-Petitioner.

The humble petition on behalf of the Applicants above named most respectfully –

S H E W E T H:

That on 8^th October 2013, the Defence counsel engaged by Accused Petitioner completed cross examination of the Investigating Officer (IO), PW-26. On 21^st October 2013, the first Defence Witness, DW-1 deposed on behalf of the Accused Petitioner before this Hon’ble Tribunal. On 3^rd November 2013, DW-4 completed his deposition before this Hon’ble Tribunal and the Prosecution commenced its closing arguments. On 6^th November 2013, the Prosecution concluded its closing arguments.

That on 7^th November 2013, the Defence commenced its closing arguments before this Hon’ble Tribunal. Thereafter, the Defence was due to make further closing submissions from 10^th November 2013.

That on 9^th November 2013, the Opposition political parties called a country-wide hartal (strike) for 84 hours from 6AM on 10^th November 2013 to 6 PM on 13^th November 2013.

That as a result of the hartals called from 10^th November to 13^th November 2013, it has not been possible for the learned defence counsel, Mr. Mizanul Islam to appear before this Hon’ble Tribunal on the aforesaid dates to make closing submissions in the instant case. It is stated that in view of his physical disabilities, the learned Defence Counsel, Mr. Mizanul Islam is required to move from one place to another in a wheel-chair. In such circumstances, it is stated that it is impossible for the learned Defence counsel, Mr. Mizanul Islam to travel from his residence/chambers in Paltan to the Tribunal in the absence of a suitable motor vehicle.

That it is stated that during the country-wide hartals from 10^th November to 13^th November 2013 there has been widespread violence in various parts of Dhaka City, including Paltan, Bijoy Nagar and Segun Bagicha. Many vehicles were torched and many people lost their lives. In the afternoon of 12^th September 2013 alone, 9 commuters were burnt after a bus was burnt in the capital’s Jatrabari area. It is specifically stated that the torching of motor vehicles and buses during hartals has become a common phenomenon. In such circumstances, it has not been possible for the learned Defence Counsel to appear before the Hon’ble Tribunal on 10^th, 11^th, 12^th and 13^th November 2013 to make closing submissions in the instant case.

That furthermore, it has been the consistent practice of the superior courts of the country not to sit during hartals. Most benches of the High Court Division did not sit during the 4 day hartal from 10^th November to 13^th November 2013. Furthermore, the Benches of the High Court Division (which did sit during the hartals) did not dispose of any cases to the detriment of any party who could not be represented by any lawyer due to the hartals.

That it is specifically stated that the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh does not also dispose of cases to the detriment of the litigants (who are not represented by their Advocates) during hartals. In this regard, it is specifically stated that although the appeal of Allama Delwar Hossain Saydee was listed in the Cause List of the Appellate Division on 10^th, 11^th, 12^th and 13^th November 2013, the matter was not taken up by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the said dates as the learned Advocates for the Appellant, Allama Delwar Hossain Saydee were not present in court due to the hartals. Furthermore, the case of Mr. Ali Ahsan Mujahid was listed as Item No. 1 in the Cause List of the Appellate Division on 13^th November 2013 ‘for Order’ as to submission of Concise Statement in the said case. However, no Advocate for the Appellant was present due to the hartals and the Hon’ble Appellate Division was pleased to adjourn the matter to 14^th November 2013.

That in view of the consistent practice of the superior courts not to dispose of case to the detriment of the litigants (who are not represented by their Advocates) during hartals, it is submitted that this Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly recall its Order closing the proceedings of the case and further allow the Defence Counsels to complete their closing arguments in the instant case before this Hon’ble Tribunal.

That for the reasons as aforesaid, the Accused Petitioner prays that the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to recall the Order dated 13^th November 2013 closing the proceedings of the instant case and further allow the Defence to make further closing arguments in the instant case before this Hon’ble Tribunal.

That it is submitted that the Petitioner will be seriously prejudiced if the Defence Counsel are not allowed to make closing arguments on behalf of the Accused Petitioner in the instant case. On the other hand, no one will suffer any loss if the Defence is allowed to complete their concluding arguments in the instant case before this Hon’ble Tribunal.

Wherefore it is most humbly prayed that the Tribunal may graciously be pleased to recall the Order dated 13^th November 2013 closing the proceedings of the instant case and further to allow the Defence to complete their concluding arguments in the instant case before the International Crimes Tribunal-1, Dhaka and pass such other or further order(s) as may deem fit and proper.

And for this act of kindness, the Applicant, as in duty bound shall ever pray.