Regarding The Fairness Of Mohiuddin’s Trial

The Bangladesh desk of Amnesty International responded to an enquiry from Drishtipat, a Bangladeshi Human Rights organization, regarding their position on the deportation of convicted terrorist Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed to Bangladesh.

In response to the query from Drishtipat, Amnesty wrote:

Amnesty will not oppose the investigation of those accused of human rights violations, and the trial and conviction of those who have been found to be involved in human rights violations. However, such investigtions and trials should be informed by three main standards: that torture is not used to extract information; that trials are in accordance with international fair trial standards, and that the death penalty is not imposed as punishment.

In the case of Mr Mohiuddin Ahmed, his conviction to death is a very problematic issue and, on that ground, Amnesty will not be able to support his extradition. [Emphasis added by Drishtipat]

Drishtipat asked for further clarification on the question of torture and fair trial. Drishtipat was kind enough to forward their question and the response they received from the Bangladesh desk of Amnesty International to me via email.

Drishtipat wrote:

Just for clarification, do you believe that fair trial was used and torture was not used as a method to extract information — the first two standards you mentioned.

Amnesty’s Bangladesh desk responded with the following clarification:

We had raised our concern regarding allegations of torture made by Zubaida Rashid, as is reflected in the document I sent to you. We had not received serious allegations of torture from others, or serious allegation of use of unfair trail procedures. If such allegations are made, we will investigate them. Our main concern with regard to these cases is the death penalty, which Amnesty opposes at all times. [Emphasis added by me.]

The one allegation of torture came from Zubaida Rashid, the wife of Lt Col (relieved) Khandaker Abdur Rashid (one of the main coup leaders). The allegations were however never substantiated, but were of concern to Amnesty and other human rights organizations. According to the report from 1997 referred to above in the response from Amnesty:

One of the defendants, Zobaida Rashid, has alleged that she has been subjected to torture in police custody. Amnesty International urges the Government of Bangladesh to institute an independent and impartial investigation to establish the truth about these allegations. Should the allegations be substantiated, the government must ensure that those found responsible are brought to justice without delay.

…

Zobaida Rashid, wife of Lt Col (relieved) Khandaker Abdul Rashid was arrested from her home in Dhaka on charges of possessing her husband’s firearm and involvement in the killing of Sheikh Mujibur and his family members. Her lawyer argued that the weapons recovered had legally-obtained licenses, that she had not been involved in the assassination at all, and that she was being "held as a hostage by the government for securing the surrender of her husband" who is believed to have gone abroad.

…

In February 1997, Zobaida Rashid told the court that she had been forced by the police to sign a "confessional" statement under duress and withdrew that statement. She alleged that during her 9-day period in police custody in November 1996 she had been given electric shocks, was made to lie on a cold bare floor, and was denied sleep for prolonged periods. She was allegedly denied any medical treatment during this period. Zobaida Rashid was eventually released on bail on 3 April 1997 on order of the High Court. Her lawyer had argued that she needed treatment for her medical conditions in an "open atmosphere".

…

On 8 April 1997, police sources announced that the court dealing with the case had framed the charges against the accused. These were: conspiracy to kill former president Sheikh Mujibur Rahman along with his family and relatives, execution of the plan and attempts to conceal and destroy evidence. Five of the six prisoners appeared in court that day and pleaded not guilty. Zobaida Rashid – already released on bail – did not appear; her lawyer told the court that she was ill. Following several days of pre-trial hearings, the court set 21 April 1997 as the trial date after indicting the 20 alleged coup plotters. The judge told the defendants: "We are here to ensure justice of a murder case under the laws of the land and the accused will get maximum protection and facilities as far as the law allows." Each of the 14 defendants to be tried in absentia were believed to have been appointed a lawyer by the courts to ensure they were defended at the trial.

On the first day of the trial on 21 April, the trial was suspended after a "no confidence" application against the judge was moved by Zobaida Rashid’s defence lawyer. The High Court rejected the motion, saying it was not moved properly. Defence sources said they intended to move the application again.

…

On 4 May, Bangladesh’s High Court suspended all trial proceedings for one month pending the outcome of an appeal challenging the framing of charges against Zobaida Rashid.

On July 6, 1997 the High Court ruled that all charges against Zobaida Rashid should be dropped and the trial against the others continued after charges were dropped against her.

After the conviction and sentencing of Mohiuddin and his co-conspirators Amnesty released a public statement reiterating its stance against the death penalty, but also stating that Amnesty "believes that a continued determination to bring to justice perpetrators of human rights violations will not only enhance the promotion and protection of human rights in the country but also eliminate the need to deal with these at a later date."

Mohiuddin’s supporters, including Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, have asserted that he did not receive a fair trial, and they have cited Amnesty International as supporting their assertion. All evidence is to the contrary. All defendants had recourse to the law and recourse to appeal to a higher court. The multiple motions and appeals during the trial by the defense, all of which received a hearing, are testament to the fairness of the trial and of the due process afforded the defendants. That Bangladesh was able to hold a fair trial in such a politically and emotionally charged trial is to its credit. Today, even the United States, which is known for the protections afforded by its legal system, has failed to offer due process to detainees it considers terrorists, holding many without trial and without due process for over five years.

Mohiuddin’s tactics to fight deportation have been used by the other absconding murderers convicted with Mohiuddin. As an example, read the case of Nur Chowdhury, another convicted terrorist and Mohiuddin’s co-conspirator, who was judged to be inadmissible by Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Board. Chowdhury however remains in Canada and will not be deported to Bangladesh because Canadian law forbids the deportation of criminals to their home countries if they are facing a death sentence. Mohiuddin is hoping for a similar fate – but the United States has no such restriction.

[Click here for a timeline of the long trial of Mohiuddin and his cohorts.]

[This post is part of a series of posts on the case of Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed that I have written and plan to write until Mohiuddin is deported to Bangladesh as has been ordered by the US courts. It remains to be seen if political intervention by Dana Rohrabacher and others on behalf of this convicted terrorists will succeed in subverting a lawful order by the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. I intend to write about this case to continue to raise awareness and to counter the spin coming from Mohiuddin and his supporters. You can read all related posts on this case here.]