From bdnews24.com
Delivering a lecture at
the Liberation War Museum on Thursday, Rafiqul Islam, who teaches at
Australia's Macquarie University, said there was 'nothing like one universally
accepted international standard for war crimes trials'.
"Where is the international standard in war crimes trials? These are all case-specific," Islam said while delivering the lecture, titled 'Importance of the national trials of international crimes in Bangladesh: A legal response to critics'.
"It is like stitching your coat to fit your size. Local realities determine how the laws to conduct the trials are made and how the trials are conducted," Islam said. "That is the global reality."
Islam said the Nuremberg and Tokyo charters after the Second World War differed greatly, though both were meant to try German and Japanese offenders responsible for war crimes.
"Germany's consent for the Nuremberg charter was not sought, but Japan's consent was sought for the Tokyo charter," he reminded his audience. "Hitler was not alive for the trials, Japanese emperor Hirohito was, and that partly explained the difference."
Islam said that the UN had organised the war crimes trials for offenders in Rwanda and erstwhile Yugoslavia.
"But were the trials conducted in similar manner? No, they were not. Local differences explain that," he said.
The East Timor example
Rafiqul Islam, who has taught law and researched on legal issues for 40 years, raised the East Timor example as a case to debunk the criticism that Bangladesh should have involved the UN in its war crimes trials.
"For those in the West who feel Bangladesh has not met international standards in its war crimes trials because it did not involve the UN, let us look at what the UN did in East Timor," Islam said.
He said that the UN and the East Timor government jointly organised the war crimes trials in the newly-liberated country in 2000.
"But the courts could try only 88 of the 400 accused before the war crimes trials were suspended in 2006," Islam said.
The funds for the trials were made available by the UN, but when the global body stopped its funding, the western judges left and the entire process fell flat on its face, Islam said.
The professor quipped: "In the west, the desire for justice subsides when funds dry up."
Islam pointed out that in ten years, there has been one judgement on the Cambodian war crimes trials. "The ICC has come up with only one verdict in 12 years and the trial has cost one billion US dollars. Is this what we want?"
"In erstwhile Yugoslavia, one accused has been waiting to be tried for the last 13 years. He has been in prison all this while. This is the kind of efficiency that we get, these are the so-called international standards that are being flaunted at us."
Islam said the war crimes trials in Bangladesh would create a 'global standard' by itself and that model can prove useful in the years to come.
"No other country has dared to conduct the war crimes trials on its own. Bangladesh did and set an example. Now countries like Guatemala and Senegal which are going to start war crimes trials soon can learn from Bangladesh."
Professional judges
Rafiqul Islam said that those who are criticising Bangladesh for failing to meet international standards should read the verdicts given by its war crimes tribunals.
"Please read the verdicts that the judges in Bangladesh have given and those given in war crimes tribunals in other countries. There is no drop in standards, the Bangladesh verdicts are detailed and comprehensive and have been arrived at through due process of law," said Islam.
"Except ICC, it is only in Bangladesh where professional judges who are thorough with local criminal law and jurisprudence have conducted the trials. So the verdicts are comprehensive," he said.
'Due process of law'
Rafiqul Islam noted that critics of the Bangladesh war crimes trials are raising the issue of 'due process of law'.
"The due process is not a monopoly of the defence. The prosecution can also take advantage of it."
Islam said the defence of the war criminals has been 'weak'.
"The defence lawyers have raised the same kind of issues again and again. Even when they were rejected in one trial, the same kind of argument was raised again to defend other war crimes accused," Islam said.
"Trials after 40 years, the Simla agreement, the 1972 trials and the definition of crimes against humanity were some of the familiar themes in the defence argument raised again and again after they were rejected in the first verdict."
The welcome speech at the Liberation War Museum event was delivered by the Museum's trustee Dr Sarowar Ali.
The lecture was part of the seven-day celebrations of Bangladesh’s liberation from Pakistan in December 1971.
"Where is the international standard in war crimes trials? These are all case-specific," Islam said while delivering the lecture, titled 'Importance of the national trials of international crimes in Bangladesh: A legal response to critics'.
"It is like stitching your coat to fit your size. Local realities determine how the laws to conduct the trials are made and how the trials are conducted," Islam said. "That is the global reality."
Islam said the Nuremberg and Tokyo charters after the Second World War differed greatly, though both were meant to try German and Japanese offenders responsible for war crimes.
"Germany's consent for the Nuremberg charter was not sought, but Japan's consent was sought for the Tokyo charter," he reminded his audience. "Hitler was not alive for the trials, Japanese emperor Hirohito was, and that partly explained the difference."
Islam said that the UN had organised the war crimes trials for offenders in Rwanda and erstwhile Yugoslavia.
"But were the trials conducted in similar manner? No, they were not. Local differences explain that," he said.
The East Timor example
Rafiqul Islam, who has taught law and researched on legal issues for 40 years, raised the East Timor example as a case to debunk the criticism that Bangladesh should have involved the UN in its war crimes trials.
"For those in the West who feel Bangladesh has not met international standards in its war crimes trials because it did not involve the UN, let us look at what the UN did in East Timor," Islam said.
He said that the UN and the East Timor government jointly organised the war crimes trials in the newly-liberated country in 2000.
"But the courts could try only 88 of the 400 accused before the war crimes trials were suspended in 2006," Islam said.
The funds for the trials were made available by the UN, but when the global body stopped its funding, the western judges left and the entire process fell flat on its face, Islam said.
The professor quipped: "In the west, the desire for justice subsides when funds dry up."
Islam pointed out that in ten years, there has been one judgement on the Cambodian war crimes trials. "The ICC has come up with only one verdict in 12 years and the trial has cost one billion US dollars. Is this what we want?"
"In erstwhile Yugoslavia, one accused has been waiting to be tried for the last 13 years. He has been in prison all this while. This is the kind of efficiency that we get, these are the so-called international standards that are being flaunted at us."
Islam said the war crimes trials in Bangladesh would create a 'global standard' by itself and that model can prove useful in the years to come.
"No other country has dared to conduct the war crimes trials on its own. Bangladesh did and set an example. Now countries like Guatemala and Senegal which are going to start war crimes trials soon can learn from Bangladesh."
Professional judges
Rafiqul Islam said that those who are criticising Bangladesh for failing to meet international standards should read the verdicts given by its war crimes tribunals.
"Please read the verdicts that the judges in Bangladesh have given and those given in war crimes tribunals in other countries. There is no drop in standards, the Bangladesh verdicts are detailed and comprehensive and have been arrived at through due process of law," said Islam.
"Except ICC, it is only in Bangladesh where professional judges who are thorough with local criminal law and jurisprudence have conducted the trials. So the verdicts are comprehensive," he said.
'Due process of law'
Rafiqul Islam noted that critics of the Bangladesh war crimes trials are raising the issue of 'due process of law'.
"The due process is not a monopoly of the defence. The prosecution can also take advantage of it."
Islam said the defence of the war criminals has been 'weak'.
"The defence lawyers have raised the same kind of issues again and again. Even when they were rejected in one trial, the same kind of argument was raised again to defend other war crimes accused," Islam said.
"Trials after 40 years, the Simla agreement, the 1972 trials and the definition of crimes against humanity were some of the familiar themes in the defence argument raised again and again after they were rejected in the first verdict."
The welcome speech at the Liberation War Museum event was delivered by the Museum's trustee Dr Sarowar Ali.
The lecture was part of the seven-day celebrations of Bangladesh’s liberation from Pakistan in December 1971.
No comments:
Post a Comment