At last the judgment of the long awaiting Jail murder case was pronounced on 20 October 2004. But this judgment is a serious miscarriage of justice. The people has termed it as a farcical judgment. So, they have spontaneously rejected it. Members of the victim's family are deeply shocked and straightway rejected it. The verdict has also been criticized by the lawyers, the intellectuals, political leaders and the journalist community.

The jail killing case is a very sensational and historic case of national importance. The case was instituted immediately after the barbaric and brutal killings of our four national leaders in the Dhaka Central Jail on 3rd November, 1975. They were Syed Nazrul Islam, Acting President, Tajuddin Ahmed, Prime Minster, Captain Monsoor Ali, Minister and A.H.M. Quamaruzzaman, Minister during the war of liberation of Bangladesh. These leaders were also close associates of the father of the nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujubur Rahman. They are those great leaders who led the war of liberation in the absence of the father of the nation. It is due to their relentless efforts, leadership, hard labour, dedication and devotion that Bangladesh emerged as an independent country after 9 month's of bloody war in 1971. So, they are also our great national war heroes. The whole nation was shocked, saddened and surprised to know with the tragic assassination of the four great leader as well as heroes of the war of liberation under safe custody of the state in the prison. Naturally, the people not only wanted to see that the killers be tried, but also be awarded capital punishment for committing such brute and heinous crime in the history of human civilization. So, peoples of all walks of life were very eager to hear the verdict of the court.

But, all the peace loving citizens of the country was dumb-founded and aggrieved with the pronouncement of this historic jail killing case. The learned Judge in his verdict has awarded death sentence to only 3 absconding accuseds including Risalder Mosleuddin out of the 20 accuseds. Out of the rest 12 accuseds were awarded life-term imprisonment and 5 were acquitted. Those who got life-term imprisonment includes 9 absconding offenders and 3 convicted prisoners awaiting death sentence in the Bangabandhu murder case. The acquitted accuseds are former Secretary General of BNP Mr. K.M. Obaidur Rahman, Shah Moazzem Hossain, Taheruddin Thakur and Major Khairuzzaman.

From the above verdict of the court, it is proved before the nation that the Government does not even hesitate to pollute the judiciary in order to protect the self-declared killers in a very planned way. With this judgment, it has become clear that we are living in a country where the Government on behalf of the state protects the killers. This BNP-Jamat Alliance government not only protected the killers, but also rewarded them by giving shelter, indulgence, assistance, encouragement, promotion and attractive job in the foreign missions.

Every sensible people understands and believes that killing of any nature calls for capital punishment for all the accused involved in it. The Jail killing case is a case of cold blooded murder in the safest place like prison by a group of armed persons. It was well planned in advance and executed through conspiracy and abetment with each other. So, the ingredients of the offence comprises of conspiracy and abetment followed by murder. As per law, in such a case, the co-accuseds shall also get the same punishment as those of the principal accuseds. But, what we find in this Judgment? Only the 3 accuseds have been awarded the capital punishment of death sentence and the other 12 accuseds were given punishment for life imprisonment. Since the case is proved i.e. commission of the offence by all the 15 or 20 accuseds has been proved beyond all reasonable doubts, all should get the same punishment irrespective of principal or co-accused. But in this case, the learned Judge has miserably failed to take into consideration the spirit and meaning of the law. So, this judgment is clearly a miscarriage of justice. On the other hand, the 4 political persons and the lone civil servant acquitted from the charges are believed to be closely involved in the course of conspiracy and abetment in commissioning the offence. One of the co-accused also gave confessional statement in this regard. But, they were acquitted on the ground of some mistakes or faults in the report of the Investigating officer (I.O.). If it is so, the court could pass an order for fresh investigation into the case. But, the court failed to do so. Moreover, while making remarks and comments on the performance of the Investing officers (I.O.) the learned Judge has used some irrelevant words which the law does not permit. The law says, "(i) The testimony and conduct of police officers examined in a criminal trial be commented upon in the judgment in the same degree as those of any other material witness, but no further (ii) The Judgment should not contain any damaging remarks regarding a witness in a criminal trial." But use of the words "farcical investigation ?" and "supporter of a political party" in the Judgment seems to be against the above principles of law. Such remarks makes the judgment defective.

Although, the Investigation officer plays a significant role in a trial, but he is also a witness in the court like other material witness. The I.O. only helps the court in discharging its Judicial function properly. But he himself can not try the case. It is the court which in consideration & examination of the facts, evidences, including circumstantial evidence and other things or facts brought before the court makes up its opinion and decides the verdict. Any minor lapses or mistakes like absence of sketch map of Bangabhaban (which is widely known to all) necessarily does not largely influence the merit of the case. So, awarding punishment less than capital punishment to the 12 accuseds and acquittal of the main conspirators and abettors of such a sensational murder case involving killings of the 4 national leaders in the jail on these pleas has totally frustrated the people.

In this connection, it may be recalled that the accused like Col. Farook and Rashid fled away from the country to Bangkok by a special plane immediately after the Jail killing. On arrival there and in other occassions, they disclosed proudly before the press and some other foreign nationals that they were involved in the killings of the national leaders including Bangabandhu. That was their voluntary declaration and as such they are identified as self-declared killers which necessarily does not require any additional proof. Even then, if the above self-declaration of the accused are corroborated by substantial evidences and the court has got reasons to believe in them, they also deserve capital punishment. Again, it is unbelievable that Col. Farook, Col. Rashid, Major Bazlul Huda and Risalder Mosleuddin and others acted upon their own decisions. There must have been some political decision by some of the political leaders in the Bangabhaban at that time. In fact the self proclaimed president Khondker Mustaq Ahemd who illegally seized power on 15th August, 1975 alongwith his political associates M/S K.M. Obaidur Rahman, Shah Moazzam Hossain, Taheruddin Thakur & Nurul Islam Manzur and rebellious army officers under the leadership of Col. Farook and Rashed Jointly took the decision for jail killings. The executors of the killing operation acted upon this political decision. As such, a group of the killers were allowed free passage to Bangkok immediately after the killings by a special plane by the then Junta in power. That Junta includes the 4 political persons acquitted in the judgment.

Awarding different nature of punishments to different accuseds involved in committing the same offence through conspiracy and abetment and releasing some others by ignoring the above facts, circumstances, realities and blaming the I.O. has actually weakened the case. So, it would not be inappropriate to say that this judgment is a defective one. It is aimed at acquitting all the convicted accuseds in the higher Court on appeal. It is also difficult to believe that a Judge may deliver such a defective judgment if he at all could apply his judicial mind. Therefore, there is no doubt that that Judge could not act judiciously due to some unholy and secret interference of the Government. So, this judgment can not be termed as a judgment at all. Now, the question arises why the Government has been making such efforts to protect the killers. The simple answer is indebtedness of the present Government and the preceding Governments of BNP to the killers. They are and were the beneficiaries of the assassination of the father of the nation and killing of the four national leaders. In order to pave the way of their prolonged rule, they wanted to make Bangladesh Awami League free from leadership. All these proves the political motive of the present Government behind this Court verdict.

Government interference in this case stating from investigation to pronouncement of Judgment is also evident from the following facts:

a) Extra judicial killing is forbidden by law and it is against Article 31 of our constitution which reads as under :

"To enjoy the protection of the law, and to be treated in accordance with law, and only in accordance with law, is the inalienable right of every citizen, wherever he may be, and of every other person for the time being within Bangladesh, and in particular no action detrimental to the life, liberty, body, reputation or property of any person shall be taken except in accordance with law." (Article 31 of the Constitution)

But in case of the killing of the four national leaders the provision of Articles 31 has always been violated by all the Governments of BNP and they always sided with the killers instead of the victims & their families.

b) The state is duty bound to prosecute & punish the killers. But, in this case, the Government on behalf of the state always protected or tend to protect the killers.

c) Trial of the case was dishonestly and intentionally delayed by long 29 years although there was no indemnity on it.

d) An Enquiry Commission was formed by the then President Justice Sayem immediately after the jail killing on 3rd November 1975. But, General Zia Captured state power from the back door and declared himself as the President before the start of enquiry by the Enquiry Commission. On capturing the state power, General Zia (later on founder of BNP) stopped functioning of that Enquiry Commission.

e) Later on General Zia rewarded the self-declared killers through diplomatic assignments abroad.

f) When the Kheleda-Nizami Government has been putting numerous Awami League leaders and workers behind the bar under the so-called Speedy Trial Act, in the name of the farce trial in order to suppress the opposition and to satisfy their dishonest motive, they are doing everything possible to delay the Bangabandhu murder case and the case of killing of the four national leaders in the Jail. Whereas, these cases deserve the highest consideration both from political and national point of view.

g) Transfer of the I.O. of this case first out of Dhaka and then sending him on forced retirement was intended to damage the case.

h) Resisting the public prosecutor (P.P) appointed by the previous Government in discharging his responsibilities in a planned way and subsequently forcing him to resign, then, appointing a P.P. of their choice and getting the job done in favour of the accesseds were clear indications of their nasty motives.

i) Reciprocal accusations of the P.P. and the I.O. against each other after the pronouncement of the Judgment clearly proves that they in the name of conducting the case served the interest of the accuseds.

j) Instead of passing an order for further investigation, pronouncement of a defective Judgment awarding different punishments to some accuseds and acquittal of some others paved the way for acquittal of all the accuseds in the Appellate court and set an example of farcical judgment in the name of trial.

k) In the opinion of the Judge, although the charges of murder, conspiracy & abetment have been proved against 15 accuseds they were awarded varying punishments from death sentence to life-term imprisonment. These contradict with the law provided for trial of such offence. The accuseds will naturally take advantage of this weakness of the Judgment in the Higher Court.

l) Although the 12 convicted accuseds alongwith the 5 others were present at Bangabhaban in making the conspiracy, the former group were punished and the later group having political identity were acquitted. This is self-contradictory and gives scope to those convicted to be acquitted at appeal stage.

From the above, it transpires that the political decision of the Government has been reflected in the Judgment of Jail Killing case. By doing so, the Khaleda-Nizami Government has not only made Bangladesh an ineffective state, but also made the judiciary of this country ineffective and farcical. As a result of this Judgment the killers would be inspired and political killings would become state policy in running the government. This is really a dangerous signal for the nation.

Judgment of the Jail killing case being a defective and farcical one, Bangaldesh Awami League alongwith the people has straitway rejected it. The party also demands for free and fair justice in order to uphold the values and image of the judiciary and save the country from any national disaster.

Newsletter _______________________
Vol. 3, No. 18, October 30, 2004
Bangladesh Awami League Publication