Tribunal recalls arrest order

The International Crimes Tribunal-2 yesterday recalled the arrest warrant it had issued against Gonoshasthaya Kendra founder Zafrullah Chowdhury for non-payment of a fine imposed on him for contempt of court.

The tribunal recalled the warrant after Zafrullah, a freedom fighter, submitted before it a copy of the Supreme Court order staying the tribunal's verdict against him till July 5, acting deputy registrar of the tribunal Md Aftafuzzaman told The Daily Star.

Earlier on June 10, the tribunal found Zafrullah guilty of contempt of court and imprisoned him at the courtroom for an hour for criticising punishment of Bangladesh-based UK journalist David Bergman. The tribunal also ordered him to pay Tk 5,000 in fine within seven days, in default of which he would have to serve one month in prison.

However, the Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed the tribunal's verdict until July 5 following a petition moved by the convict. Justice Hasan Foez Siddique, chamber judge at the Appellate Division of the SC, also sent the petition to the full bench of the court for hearing on July 5.

Meanwhile, the three-member Tribunal-2 led by Justice Obaidul Hassan on Thursday issued an arrest warrant for Zafrullah after the deadline for payment of Tk 5,000 expired on Wednesday.

Neither Zafrullah nor his lawyer informed the tribunal about the SC order.

Zafrullah yesterday went to the tribunal around 11:15am and submitted the SC order to the tribunal's registrar office.

He said the tribunal "wrongly" and "hastily" issued the arrest warrant although both the electronic and print media widely reported the SC stay order. Besides submitting the SC order, he requested the tribunal to withdraw the "wrongly" issued warrant, Zafrullah said.

Attorney General Mahbubey Alam on Thursday said it was the responsibility of Zafrullah's lawyers to inform the tribunal about the SC order. As the copy of the order was not sent to the tribunal, it rightly issued the warrant against the convict upon expiry of the fine payment deadline.

On December 2 last year, the tribunal found Bergman, editor (special reports) of English daily the New Age, guilty of contempt for writing two blog posts in January 2013 on the verdict in the case against Abul Kalam Azad. The journalist was sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the court that day and fined Tk 5,000.

The daily Prothom Alo on December 20 last year ran a report headlined "50 people express concern over Bergman's punishment". The signatories of a statement said the order would curb freedom of expression, according to the report. One of the signatories, Khushi Kabir, later parted from the statement.

When the tribunal asked the other 49 to explain their statement, 26 of them apologised unconditionally. The court exonerated them from the charge but initiated contempt proceedings against the rest as it was not convinced with their replies.

On June 10, the tribunal pardoned 22 signatories as they regretted their action and "were not well aware of the consequences of the action". But the court punished Zafrullah as he committed the same offence twice.

Earlier, the International Crimes Tribunal-1 had found his comment on the war crimes trial contemptuous but pardoned him with a serious caution.

Under the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973, a contempt convict cannot challenge the order of a tribunal. But the High Court has recently observed that a convict can do so.