War crimes trial
The government is always defending this war crimes trial issue to condemn any act of the opposition. If that is so, why not make it more transparent and visible to justify the defence? The news reports coming from various quarters are very uncoordinated and disconnected to find out exactly what is the status of the trial process.
In the meantime, the process of arrest of the alleged criminals is raising two vital questions such as:
a. Can they be brought to justice following all legal formalities which at times fall apart due to legal complications or anomalies; and also for the physiological pressure put on the system by political power of the defendant and the plaintiff.
b. Is the Jamaat becoming more popular and politically powerful to come out successfully and uproot the government with the support of its allies?
In my own judgment the concern for the international community about the legal implications of the law being followed for the trial is basically for the "Preamble" of the law. This extends the law beyond the jurisdiction of Bangladesh to try any alleged criminal for war crimes in 1971 in Bangladesh.
My humble suggestion would be that those who directly or indirectly oppose the trial of the war crime be formally asked to admit or deny the fact of war crime in Bangladesh.
I very much understand the sensitivity of such a direct question and its implications on the trial process. But do we have any other positive and quick alternative to start and finish the trial ? Let our legal experts and intelligentsia group ( no civil society, please) come up with their clear advice from a formal forum and not a "Round table" funded by the external allies.
Why is the whole burden of the trial put on the AL alone ? What about other parties ?
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments