Death penalty is murder, Bangladesh. Not justice
Bangladesh is a neighbour country, liberated by India in the famous war of 1971. It has a geography - at once fertile and fragile. Its population is 162 million with tribals and non-Muslims.
Imagine 1950 when India became a republic with around 350-odd million people. If we had that population now, both development and socioeconomic justice would have assured. But that was not to be.
Bangladesh's demography has it within its power to achieve many of these aims and objectives. Bangladeshis are a formidable people.
Their cricket excels, their export ventures are successful. They are industrious and the economy is poised to thrive.
Democracy
But their democracy is tragically flawed in two distinct ways. The rise of Islamic terrorism (not Islamism) has led to people being hacked to death.
At the end of April and May 2016 there were ten cases of such gruesome killings. There is no way that this madness will stop. Violence breeds violence.
Bangladesh has gone through dictatorship for long periods of time. Its return to parliamentary democracy has been slow and vindictive. Two women have dominated the political process.
Sheikh Hasina, the founder of Bangladesh Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's daughter and her archrival Khalida Zia wife of the dictator Ziahur Rehman. Before Pakistan left Bangladesh they ordered "operation searchlight to ferret out people whom they arrested and killed".
The present prime minister puts the figure at three million dead. The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) observed there was systematic elimination not incidental violation Sheikh Mujibur enacted up the Bangladesh Collaboration (Special Tribunal) Order 1972.
 |
| Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina. (Reuters) |
Later he was murdered. After the amnesty of 1973, about 752 were jailed for rape, murder, arson, looting, one (Chikon Ali) was sentenced to death.
Decades later, following Sheikh Hasina's electoral commitment the dormant International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) was revived in 2012. This was not an international tribunal in the sense of Nuremburg, Serbia, Rwanda. It was a self-styled creation - virtually like a Star Chamber which could do what it likes. The watch agencies were alarmed.
Human Rights Watch reported on the death sentence of Ahsan Mohammad Mujahid (Jamaat-e-Islam) and Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury (Bangladesh National Party) - both of the Opposition. Geoff Robertson QC's exposition is detailed in its information and pungent in its criticism.
Last time, I wrote of the Salahuddin Chowdhury case, it was alleged that he committed several crimes in the 1971 civil war. I read the judgment of 2015 with dismay.
A death warrant was issued and Salahuddin was hung. He had a perfect defence: he was not in Bangladesh at the time. Witnesses were prepared to prove this. They were not allowed to do so. After reading the article, Salahuddin's son was in touch with me. We commiserated together. He is a brave young man who is determined to fight on.
Murder
Now the Supreme Court has convicted Motiur Rahman Nizami for murder, rape and mass killing. It appears 197 people have been sentenced to death in Bangladesh, including four by the ICT.
On May 10, 2016 Nizami was put to death. During the trial the prosecution were allowed 22 witnesses, the defence only four.
Defence lawyers, I was informed, were not allowed to cross-examine an important prosecution witness. The prosecution had almost two years to prepare their case, the defence three weeks.
The ICT, cases are not justice but murder. A tribunal cannot provide legitimisation to either the process or the regime. They might as well have been hung without the farce of a tribunal.
There are three important points. The first is that those guilty of genocide must be tried. We are now looking at facts of 1971 (45 years ago). Proof has aged into doubt.
It is time for conciliatory amnesty and justice commissions. The ICT is no answer - certainly not through a crooked and unfair process with a revenge motive emanating from a motivated regime devoted to vindictiveness.
Second, due process is the heart and soul of the law. Without it all legal processes are unfair, arbitrary and unconstitutional. Without due process and substantive procedural reasonableness the law is dictatorial based not even on suspicion but finger pointing. This is uncivilised.
Third, I, for one, am against the death penalty. Killing by authority of law is a murder of its own kind. In India, we say, it should be done in the rarest of rare cases - even that is unworkable. We cannot thirst for revenge and simultaneously talk of peace.
Trouble
Peace does not come easily to a trouble nation. The area known as Bangladesh has suffered many times over. It suffered the agony of death and destruction during 1947 Partition. Then, again in 1971.
There can be no compromise with genocide. These are crimes against humanity.
To allow memory to obfuscate tragedy is to lose one's sense of history and humanity. Genocide should not be forgotten.
But can you try people on suspicion, without fairness; and carry out sentences of death?
Unproved cases are half-baked fake cases - more sinned against the sinning. There can be no justice without humanity.
We may not forget, but should we punish those who are not proven guilty? We may not forgive, but we are not absolved from finding the truth.
Whether the law should permit the state to kill is another matter. Bangladeshi justice stumbles at the first step of justice: due process and proof. In these matters only proof beyond all reasonable doubt will do.
(Courtesy of Mail Today.)