SQ Chy Trial: Cross-examination begins
Reported by: UNBconnect
Reported on: May 22, 2012 08:13 pm
Reported in: National
Dhaka, May 22 (UNB) - Prosecution witness M Salim Ullah, who is still haunted by persecution he had suffered at Salauddin Quader Chowdhury’s ‘Goods Hill’ abode, on Tuesday told the International Crimes Tribunal-1 that it is not true that he faked illness to get sympathy of the tribunal. During the cross-examination, PW-2 Salim Ullah, also the maternal uncle of Jatiya Party stalwart Anisul Islam Mahmud, repeatedly urged the counsel for detained accused BNP MP Salauddin Quader Chowdhury to refrain from making fun about his illness. Businessman Salim Ullah, who read up to degree at Chittagong College, told the tribunal that during his student life he did not exercise in theatrical performance. Replying to a question, Salim Ullah said he did not make any false statement before the tribunal and reiterated that curfew had been imposed in Chittqgong city with effect from 6 pm on September 2, 1971, the day he was forcibly taken to Goods Hill, persecuted and held hostage overnight in a 2-storey garage of Goods Hill, “used as a torture cell during the Liberation War”.Asked whether there was any documentary proof about the curfew imposed on September 2, 1971, the PW said he was not supposed to preserve the document in this regard. Replying to another question, Salim Ullah said he did not know whether the Pakistan army occupied Chittagong city on April 10, 1971. Asked whether he had gone to India during the war, the PW replied in the negative.Held in presence of the accused, the cross-examination of the PW-2 by defence counsel Ahsanul Huq Hena remained inconclusive.Later, the three-member tribunal, headed by Justice M Nizamul Huq heard an application filed by war crimes accused detained Jamaat-e-Islami leader Delwar Hossain Sayedee seeking review of the tribunal order delivered on March 29 that had allowed in part a prosecution plea under section 19 (2) of the ICT Act 1973 accepting 15 out of 19 prosecution witnesses’ recorded statements by the investigation officer as their testimonies against Sayedee who faces trial.Section 19(2) of the ICT Act says: ”A tribunal may receive in evidence any statement recorded by a Magistrate or an Investigation Officer being a statement made by any person who, at the time of the trial, is dead or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which the Tribunal considers unreasonable.”Barrister Abdur Razzaq, the principal counsel for Jamaat war crimes accused persons, and BNP lawyers Moudud Ahmed, Khandker Mahbub Hossain and Zainul Abedin made arguments on the review petition.The prosecution counsel will make counter-arguments on Wednesday.The review application was filed relying upon recent reports published in two newspapers -Amar Desh and Naya Diganta - and almost identical report aired by Islamic TV and Diganta TV expressing doubt about the prosecution plea of non-availability of the listed PWs for giving their evidence before the tribunal.
View Full Site