Prosecution claims they belittled court's authority, dignity in public mind

Twenty three of the 50 eminent citizens "belittled" authority and institutional dignity of International Crimes Tribunal-2 in the public mind by expressing concern in a statement over Dhaka-based British journalist David Bergman's sentence, which goes against "public interest", and thus should be "punished adequately", said the prosecution yesterday. 

Placing arguments on the prosecution's behalf, Tureen Afroz, referring to sections of the statement, also accused them of questioning justification of the tribunal's sentence and the "transparency and openness" of the tribunal's judicial proceedings.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Shireen Huq, one of the 23, said they did not commit any offence as the statement's content fell under the parameters of "fair criticism." 

The tribunal, led by Justice Obaidul Hassan with members Justice Md Mozibur Rahman Miah and Justice Md Shahinur Islam, adjourned until May 14 the contempt proceedings, initiated against the 23 on April 1.

On December 2, 2014, the tribunal found Bergman, editor (special reports) of New Age, guilty of contempt for two of his blog posts of January 2013 on the verdict of Abul Kalam Azad, known as Bachchu Razakar.

It sentenced him to imprisonment "till rising of the court" that day and fined him Tk 5,000.

On December 20, 2014, the daily Prothom Alo ran a report titled "50 people express concern over Bergman's punishment" on the basis of the statement, which observed that the tribunal's order would restrict freedom of expression.

One signatory, Khusi Kabir, later withdrew her name. The tribunal exonerated 26 signatories who sought unconditional apology.

Yesterday, Shireen, reading out the reply she and Zafrullah Chowdhury and Shahidul Alam gave earlier, said they had no intention to "hurt the tribunal".

She said they did not question the sentence's justification but opined on the decision's impact on the scope of freedom of speech. Earlier lawyers of 12 alleged contemners gave similar arguments.

Tureen referred to the section of the statement which reads, "The sentencing of David Bergman is nothing but a continuation of curbing of all forms of freedom of expression and differences of opinion about the International Crimes Tribunal".

"Such allegation against this honourable tribunal is utterly false, malicious, ill-motivated and baseless," said Tureen, adding that the alleged contemners cannot lower the tribunal's prestige or authority even in the "garb of criticising judgments".

Tureen said there has been an "unholy organised domestic and international attempt" since the tribunal's inception to question its judicial process and Bergman's criticism in his articles, in other words, has simply endorsed such an "organised ill and futile endeavour".

"The impugned statement has failed to serve any interest except for serving the interest of the unholy organized domestic and international quarter involved in baseless criticism of the (International Crimes [Tribunals] Act) 1973 law and the judicial process under the same," said Tureen.

STATEMENT IN BANGLA

Yesterday, Shireen placed the Prothom Alo report, saying they all gave their consent reading a statement, written in Bangla and sent by Hana Shams Ahmed, another signatory.

Justice Hassan said following the court's order, the Prothom Alo editor submitted an unsigned copy of the statement written in English. Asked, Hana said she sent two statements, one in Bangla and the other in English, to Prothom Alo.

Hana, however, did not disown the one in English.

Tureen said the statement submitted by Prothom Alo was also published in the Daily Observer, New Age and The Independent.

The tribunal then asked Shireen and Hana to submit today the statement written in Bangla, apparently finding some discrepancies between the statement in English and the Prothom Alo report.