On Tuesday, November 6,
2012, the defence of war crimes accused Jamaat-e-Islami leader Delawar
Hossain Sayedee boycotted International Crimes Tribunal-1 as the prosecution
began arguments in the case. The day was fixed for the start of the
prosecution's arguments in the case. Before that, the defence in the morning
alleged before the tribunal "plainclothes police abducted" their
witness from the road near the High Court shrine. According to news report, the
defence demanded direction from the tribunal in this regard. Interestingly,
while the tribunal wanted to take a little break to enquire about the allegation,
the defence did not want to give any time for and in everyone’s dismay
boycotted the courtroom around 1:15pm and did not return after lunch break.
This was another
show staged by the defence. The local sources informed that Mr. Shukharanjan Bali was from the very beginning an element of
drama that Jamat-e-Islam Bangladesh managed through some form of miracle. Being
Hindu by religion and a key witness regarding one of the charges brought
against Sayedee (a prominent leader of Jamat-e-Islami), Mr. Shukharanjan Bali
was a trophy that defence wanted to present at any cost. In Bangladesh, it is
in general not at all common for any Hindu to affiliate with Jamat-e-Islami-
more so in case of any form of testimony concerning genocide and atrocities
conducted during the War of Independence. Jamat-e-Islami does not allow anyone
but Muslims to be its members (this is a violation of the registration law of
the country under the present Election Council law) and the party does not find
any fault in its position during 1971 when it functioned as auxiliary forces of
invading Pakistani military.
Nevertheless, on the blogs- many “experts” conducted
analysis on the issue. Although, these discussions died out soon as - no
concrete evidence in favor of the alleged abduction could be found and no
reliable witness could be produced by the defence. The defence lawyers and
journalists with close political affiliations with Jamat-e-Islami Bangladesh
were the only witnesses.
On
the blog, few photos from CC camera were posted (while claims were made
that the images of the CC camera remained unexplored) -which showed no evidence
regarding the validity of the alleged abduction. The photos were circulated to
establish a visual confusion – as in many occasion people do not read the fine
prints below the photographs. Let us have a look at few of these photos:
 |
|
1. White vehicle coming parked
outside one of the tribunal
gates. The journalist Golam Azam is said to be the person in the foreground. At this point, Bali is said to have already been put in the car. |
2. Close up of vehicle. Man on
outside is claimed to be from
detective branch. The unclear figure in the car is said to be that of Bali who was wearing a white shirt on the day. The face on the other side of the car, outside, is said to be that of Advocate Sohag |
 |
|
3. Police vehicle leaving the
tribunal with Bali inside. The man in the foreground of the picture
is said to be that of the journalist Shahidul Islam |
It can be seen that none of these images
can be treated as visual proof. One of the “self-designated monitor”, of ICT
Bangladesh, used quotes of one of his source in his post and then changed it by
saying, “The original post said that Tajul Islam had said that the witness
stayed at the house of Masud Sayedee, the son of Delwar Hossain Sayedee. Whist
that was what Islam had said to me, this is apparently not what happened. In
fact he stayed at the house of a relative.” These reflect how unprofessional these web-posts are even though they
are broadly circulated.
None of these posts and analyses stopped to question- why
would the police choose to “abduct” the defence witness from within the premise
of the Tribunal? or Why is there not a single witness beyond the defence
lawyers and pro-Jamat journalist? More importantly - why the witness at the
first place choose to cooperate with Jamat-e-Islam (a political party which is
notorious for its anti Hindu campaign not just during 1971- it continues the
same culture of spreading hate and carrying out rampage against the religious
minorities in Bangladesh till date)?? Let us close the case by informing on
Jamat-e-Islami Bangladesh and its relation with people like Mr. Shukharanjan Bali. Recently the cloud of confusion over
Jamat’s democratic practices was cleared at least for Amnesty. Recently at the
outburst of violent campaign of Jamat-e-Islami Bangladesh, the Amnesty
report provided context to the violence against the Hindus in the backdrop
of Bangladesh's war crimes trials. “The
Hindu community in Bangladesh is at extreme risk, in particular at such a tense
time in the country. It is shocking that they appear to be targeted simply for
their religion. The authorities must ensure that they receive the protection
they need,” said Abbas Faiz, Amnesty’s Bangladesh Researcher. Victims told
Amnesty that the attackers were taking part in rallies organised by Islamist
party Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) and its student group Islami Chhatra Shibir.
Conclusion:
1. The blog-based journalists and web-based
news media have reflected unprofessional attitude (by using unreliable sources
and making strong comments without any support of evidence) regarding ICT
Bangladesh. This raises a caution- as the world media and global human rights
organizations are often depended upon these forms of reporting- a reality and
reliability check should be made before citing any such reports.
2. The approach of using visuals in
blog-reporting can confuse unsuspecting readers who often tend to ignore the
fine prints below the photos (sometimes these images are left without any
title).
3. Jamat-e-Islami Bangladesh is keeping
no stone unturned in its attempt to discredit the charges brought against its
leaders on the count of crimes against humanity- this may involve dramatic
events. Wise heads must prevail to question reliability of any such event as
Jamat is only depending on forceful presentation of its case- not on accuracy
or legality of their means.
The baffled armatures on the blogs are not the only
campaigners who are spreading confusions over the ICT Bangladesh process. There
are obviously pro-Jamat-motivated web campaigners who are also undermining the
trial to free the imprisoned leaders of their alleged Islamic outfit of communal,
undemocratic and violent war criminals.
