Oh, yeah ! That was the revenge of the "Officers" ..... Colonel Taher was found "guilty as charged" in a sham- trial ..... not only that ... another 253 ordinary soilders were hanged in the Dhaka Central Jail to "supress the rebellion" and an officerdom was created in Bangladesh, which is continuing till to day.[Just guess, Who is running the Care Taker Government in Bangladesh ] Read the glimpse of the sham-trial below: Reflections on Colonel Taher's death AMM Shawkat Ali Every year Colonel Taher is remembered on the date he was hanged by the neck until he was dead. The hanging took place in Dhaka Central Jail on July 21, 1976. The verdict on his death by hanging was said to have been passed by a Special Military Tribunal at a time when the country had its first bout of experience with martial law. It may well be called the third bout if the infamous martial laws of 1958 and 1969 of pre-1971 period are taken into account Reflections on Colonel Taher's death this year is significantly different from all previous years. The primary reason is the number of meetings and columns in the media that unfolded some untold stories relating to the circumstances that led to the infamous verdict on his death by hanging. The major contribution in this regard has been made by Lawrence Lifschultz who worked for the Far Eastern Economic Review. Lifschultz appears to have made the point, not unknown to many in Bangladesh, that it was simply a mockery of trial. Indeed, any trial by a specially constituted military tribunal by its very nature is a denial of justice as it is known and understood in a civilised sense. What has been left unsaid is the fact that on August 14, 1975, a duly elected government was overthrown through a military coup organised by a small number of retired and serving army officers of relatively junior rank. They remained above law for a long time and were protected probably to justify the dictum that a successful revolution is its own justification. However, the substantive point made by Lifschultz is that (a) even the trial by the special military tribunal was vitiated by legal flaws, (b) the trial was not held in pubic but in closely guarded high security area within the precincts of the Dhaka Central Jail, (c) the lawyers for the prosecution and defence had to utter oaths of secrecy relating to the trial and (d) the trial was completed with undue haste. In sum, Taher was denied the due process of law which led Lifschultz to conclude that it was utterly wrong and the time has come for the government to admit it to be so. He has cited the cases in other countries and advocated the constitution of a commission more or less on the lines of the Truth Commission of South Africa. The primary objective is to bring out the truth and not force the citizens of today and tomorrow to continue to believe what essentially may well be a pack of lies. Is that possible? The impassioned appeal made by Lifschultz may well fall on deaf ears if the powers that are or will be in future. For the present government, it is all the more so because of historical connections of the BNP with its founding father, late general Ziaur Rahman. It was during his initial rise to power, after a series of coups and counter-coups, that the ill-framed verdict was announced. In 1976, he was not the chief marital law administrator (CMLA) but was nevertheless the chief of the army. It is a sad and tragic commentary on the role played by a former chief justice who thought it fit to adorn the offices of CMLA as well as the president. Even more saddening is the fact that Lifschultz has cited the commitment of the very same chief justice quoting his own verdict in the case relating to Purnachandra Mandal. In that case, the chief justice asserted that the inalienable right of a citizen as an accused person to have access to the due process of law cannot be interfered with. This commitment of a judge, if Lifschultz is to be believed, vanished when the judge adorned the two most powerful offices of CMLA and president. However, without further material evidence supportive of this conclusion, it is perhaps not fair to arrive at a definite and incontrovertible conclusion. Freedom of the press denied As with will martial law situations, freedom of the press not only in terms of access to information but also the right to publish information on the infamous trial was denied. Lifschultz was first detained and later deported. He, however, could smuggle out his story on the process of trial. Why special military tribunal? The constitution of a Special Military Tribunal cannot perhaps be questioned. That is the standard procedure when a country is under martial law. The precedence in this regard was set first in 1958 and then in 1969 when Bangladesh formed the eastern part of Pakistan. Generally, two types of military courts are set up to quell any resistance to martial law government. A court of inferior jurisdiction called the Summary Martial Law Court and one of higher jurisdiction called the Special Military Court. The debate opened by Lifschultz merits further probe. Did the tribunal which passed the verdict conform to the latter type? During 1958 and in 1969, Special Military Courts held the proceedings of trial in the open public view, of course within the precincts of the court room. The trial of Taher was an exception to the general precedent set by the Pakistani military rulers. This remains the major point of contention of Lifschultz. Again, during 1958 martial law, district or additional sessions judges were made members of the Special Military Court. The Summary Military Courts in some cases included magistrates. The idea probably was to put up an appearance of credibility in public. It is not known or is not otherwise clear from the account given by Lifschultz whether the Special Military Tribunal followed the same lines. This is well worth further investigation. Why oaths of secrecy for the lawyers? Another important area of further probe relates to the oaths of secrecy for the lawyers on either side of the aisle. Is this permitted under the relevant military act and army rules and instructions? Leaving aside this issue, was it permitted by the terms of reference under which the Special Military Tribunal which was constituted by a martial law order (MLO)? Did the then CMLA and President assent to such a horrendous course of action? Above all, why did the celebrated lawyers accept such demeaning arrangement? Will truth ever be known? It is idle to speculate if the mystery surrounding the infamous verdict will ever be known. Lifschultz has suggested one way-out in the form of a Truth Commission. The Truth Commission in South Africa, as far as is known, required voluntary disclosure. Obviously the lawyers participating in the trial, now dead, cannot testify voluntarily. Those who are living are relevant. Will they testify, if not before a Truth Commission which will probably never be formed, at least to the public. More threads to the untold story It is indeed relevant to add to the account given by Lifschultz. If a former chief justice who united in himself the two most powerful sources of authority for governance could not, for reasons as yet unknown, assert his authority in respect of the undue process of trial of Taher, the then Deputy Commissioner (DC) Dhaka did. Immediately after the date of hanging of Taher was fixed, there was an official direction over telephone from the Home Ministry that the DC must be present at hanging site inside Dhaka Central Jail. The DC was neither a trained lawyer nor ever, except as a sub-divisional magistrate, tried any criminal case. He was of only ten years of experience in civil service. Yet, by his sense of judgment and limited experience, he sensed something was wrong. The jail code In DC's office, there is a specific branch that deals with criminal cases and complaints relating to jail including police administration. The branch is called Judicial Munshikhana (JM) headed by a magistrate. The DC asked the magistrate-in- Account of Fazlur Rahman Fazlur Rahman told the DC then and also after his retirement from service, the courageous way that Taher faced the 'journey into the undiscovered country from whose bourne no traveller returns'. The DC retired from service in 2001 and Fazlur Rahman, as already stated, did so few years thereafter. They still fondly remember Taher for his undaunted courage of conviction and refusal to be on the receiving side. If only other sections of celebrated citizens in high office could emulate the example set by Taher, the country could be a better place of the citizens. Specially for the DC, it was very shocking. In 1974, the DC happened to issue an appointment to Taher as director of the Dredger Organisation of Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB). The DC then was member-administrati Taher met the member administration in his office and received the order of appointment. He was to be based in Narayanganj. Taher, on receipt of the order, requested the member administration to visit his office. The member administration never knew that two years later as DC he would be asked by the government to attend the hanging of Taher. Aslo read: Front Page... as the South Asia correspondent of the Far Eastern Economic Review, on Friday said it was time to overturn the judgement in the trial of Colonel Taher, ... www.newagebd. More results from www.newagebd. Putting Factions 'Back in' the Civil-Military Relations Equation ...33 The Far Eastern Economic Review, 16th January, 1976. ...... Colonel Taher's 11th sector brigade has been popularly considered as the '4th mukti bahini'. ... samaj.revues. by J Codron - 2007 - Related articles The Daily Star Web Edition Vol. 5 Num 766... South Asia correspondent for the Far Eastern Economic Review which meant I ... July 21 was the 30th anniversary of the execution of Colonel Abu Taher. ... [PDF] www.thedailystar. TAHER'S LAST TESTAMENT:File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML Bengali sould have the audacity to pass a sentence on Colonel Taher. ...... the Pakistani crackdown in East Bengal the country's revolutionary Left was far ... www.col-taher.com/UnfinishedRevo Sent by: Syed Aslam On 10/12/08, Md. Mostafa Kamal <mmk3k@yahoo.
|
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
.
__,_._,___