Thu 31 May 2007
Posted by Asif under
Bangladesh
Note from Mash:
Mohiuddin’s petition for rehearing has been denied by the 9th circuit court of appeals. He faces deportation today. However, a congressman has introduced a bill in the House to try to give him permanent residence.
Here’s my quick post on the topic:
http://www.docstrangelove.com/2007/05/30/mohiuddin-akm-ahmed-facing-imminent-deportation/
Leave a Reply
All comments are moderated. Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
May 31st, 2007 at 6:49 pm
As a matter of personal philosophy, I do not condone capital punishment… be it at the hands of RAB, CIA, Stasi, state (fill in yr favorite institution!!). If he has been convicted of a crime through due process, let him face the music but I will NOT in my right state of mind support shipping ’someone’ off to face a state sanctioned murder.
And, puhhhlease. I implore you to not box me into some AL hating, Jaamati-loving loonie bin… you can not be any further from the truth!
May 31st, 2007 at 10:02 pm
It should be also noted when the “Trial” and verdict may have been unduly influenced and in absentia. He should be given a chance to defend himself.
June 1st, 2007 at 3:42 am
News about Mohiuddin Ahmed:
1. He may be able to enter Canada as refugee asylee. Irwin Cotler , ex-Justice Minister of Canada under Liberal government and present MP ,became his lawyer for Canadian case.
2. On May 29th, CBC Radio has done an extensive interview with Sabrina Ahmed, daughter of Mohiuddin Ahmed. Here is the link to listen to the radio broadcast:
http://www.cbc.ca/radioshows/AS_IT_HAPPENS/20070529.shtml
3. On May 30th, CBC radio also did an extensive with Sheik Sajeeb Wazed Joy and Mr. Irwin Cotler, Canadian Lawyer of Mr. Mohiuddin. Here is the link to the radio broadcast:
http://www.cbc.ca/radioshows/AS_IT_HAPPENS/20070530.shtml
June 1st, 2007 at 2:44 pm
In any civilized society the accused is given the “benefit of doubt” first. Given the nature of judiciary system in Bangladesh, which can be influenced easily by the existing government what is the guarantee that the verdict against Mohiuddin is a fair and impartial one?
June 1st, 2007 at 5:25 pm
Shiblee, Mohiuddin’s trial was judged to be fair by the United States 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. They ruled against him not once, but twice. Lower courts in the US have also ruled against him. If he could have showed in court that his trial was unfair, they would not have ruled against him.
Here is the 9th Circuit’s decision:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/coa/memdispo.nsf/pdfview/022307/File/03-74603.PDF
He failed multiple times in US courts to prove his trial was unfair. I think making blanket accusations about Bangladesh may be convenient but it doesnt hold up in this specific case in a court of law, where facts matter.
Having said that, one can take a principled stand against the death penalty and argue that the US should not deport someone to a country where he faces the death penalty. However, given that the US itself has the death penalty, that argument will be difficult to sustain. The bill that Congressman McDermott introduced wants to reward Mohiuddin and his family with green cards. The bill says that he should be given a green card before all other Bangladeshis who are patiently waiting in line for a green card. I am sorry but I just dont think that the alternative to the death penalty should be a green card in the United States before all other applicants. If Congressman McDermott or others feel the death penalty is the issue, they should lobby to get Mohiuddin to serve out a life sentence in the United States for his crimes - not set him free for having committed murder. The rule of law is important and there is no reason to trump the rule of law here.
Finally, Mohiuddin can appeal his verdict to Bangladesh’s highest court, just like his co-defendents have. He has so far chosen not to do so - but nonetheless he has that option. He has fought his case in the US and has lost.
June 1st, 2007 at 10:42 pm
Mash,
you are forgetting that many innocent people have been put to death by the same US justice system you are talking about.
Just because a court in the US says a trial thousands of mile away in foreign land was fair — does not necessarily mean it was fair.
I was just reading a piece on a Canadian news site in which Mr.Mohiuddin’s son claims that Bangladesh court refused to accept affidavits from several people which would have proved Mr.Mohiuddin’s innocence.
I hope Canada would do the right thing and grant him asylum.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:35 am
Hasib, if I use your reasoning than we should let all prisoners out of jails. Blanket claims cannot be used to debunk specific court rulings.
Amnesty International also said the trial was fair. What criteria do you use to judge that a trial was fair since neither the Bangladeshi court system or the American justice system seem to satisfy you?
Feel free to visit Mohiuddin’s website and check out the so-called affadavits that have just come to light. The did not hold up in US courts. http://www.freedin.org
They have made various arguments. None have stuck. One was that the Indemnity Ordinance gives him immunity for the murders. They make that argument while at the same time claiming that he was not involved. How odd.
Having lost in a court of law, making claims of innocence without substance simply is not good enough.
Canada already turned down Mohiuddin’s accomplice, Nur Chowdhury, who tried a similar argument to seek asylum in Canada. He was turned down. Here’s the decision in his case:
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/rtf/reflex/fulltext/300c/id/jA400992_e.rtf
Its a long decision but worth reading. So, if Canada were to do the “right thing”, it would not grant entry to a convicted murderer.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:40 am
A court in the US says that Mohiuddin’s trial was fair but that’s not good enough for Shiblee/Hasib. According to them, Bangladeshi court system is obviously biased. So, pray tell, where should Mr Mohiuddin be tried? Or do you think that this doesn’t matter.
June 2nd, 2007 at 3:42 am
Mash,
Amnesty International is against death sentence and you are saying that Amnesty deems this trial as fair?
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA130021997?open&of=ENG-BGD
1. Amnesty International is aware that as of late May 1997, there has been no substantial hearing of the case due to repeated adjournment of the hearings on procedural points raised by the defence. However, it urges the Government of Bangladesh to ensure at all times that these trials conform to the internationally established fair trial standards.
2.Amnesty International is urging the Government of Bangladesh to ensure that the accused are not sentenced to death as this would violate their most fundamental right, the right to life. Amnesty International opposes the imposition of the death penalty at all times and considers it to be an ultimate form of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
3.Amnesty International urges the Government of Bangladesh to institute an impartial and independent inquiry into allegations by the accused that they have been subjected to torture and ill-treatment. Should these allegations be substantiated, the perpetrators should be brought to justice without delay.
In fact, Amnesty Canada is urging not to send Mr.Mohiuddin to Bangldesh:
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/June2007/01/c8181.html
So, If you are against death sentence, you should not support Mr. Mohiuddin’s deportation to Bangladesh — whether or not he actually enforced a roadblock or pulled the trigger on Mujib.
June 2nd, 2007 at 4:10 am
Hasib,
Do not confuse the fairness of the trial with Amnesty’s stance against the death penalty. They are not the same. Amnesty also makes that distinction.
Amnesty’s position is against the death penalty. Drishtipat inquired a few month ago about Amnesty’s position on the trial and got the following response:
They further added:
You of course can oppose the deportation because you are against the death penalty. However, you have argued in your earlier comment here and on my blog that the trial was unfair. There is simply no credible evidence that it was.
I see that you have cited the link to the press release put out by Mohiuddin’s family from freedin.org. They certainly have a powerful PR machine working for them. However, PR does not usually work in a court of law.
June 2nd, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Mash,
I have no doubt the trial was unduly influenced by Awami League and I am not going to quote anything here.
All sects of life in Bangladesh society is corrupt - and that does not exclude Judges,Lawyers and Police. You can see a glimpse of this corrupt culture unfolding in the present anti-corruption drive.
So I have no reason to believe the trial was fair no matter how much you claim it was.
June 2nd, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Hasib, you are entitled to your opinion. The fact is however that neither Amnesty International, nor the US State Department or the US 9th circuit appeals court believe the trial was unfair. They have all looked at the trial. The US courts have specifically looked at the evidence and the trial procedure. They all disagree with you.
Your blanket assertion that the trial was unfair flies in the face of all evidence to the contrary.
June 2nd, 2007 at 5:27 pm
#8 (Jyoti):
Please understand, even in the US numerous examples abound that men/women have been sent to the electric chair whence they haven’t been guilty.
Surely, the US court has no jurisdiction to try Mohiuddin on criminal (i.e. murder charges) since it didn’t happen on US soil.
The US court(s) can only review his petition for asylum. Let us not deviate from the main point. The main point being Mohiuddin was tried in BD courts in absentia; I believe, in absentia being the issue. Even in the worst of judiciary system(s)an accused is allowed to defend him/herself.
Plenty of evidence remains, this was not the exact circumstance(s) under which Mohiuddin’s trail took place (refer to documentation from the trial in Dhaka).
When one argues about maximum penalty, it also ought to be assured (e.i. guaranteed) by maximum, most fair and most unbiased/impartial of trials. yes, 100% impartiality must be maintained, as well as ensured. Judicial impartiality, apart from other attributes is a true indicator of a civilized society (it has been since time immemorial).
I agree, justice is blind. However, this blindness should not cause an innocent to pay through his life. Will the BD govt. assure his right to appeal to the Supreme Court (i.e. habeas corpus)? Since we have a national emergency declared and existing in BD now
Do you agree…? I am indeed open to other views.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:40 pm
#5 (mash):
I can not but be appalled at your statement(s) from evidence submitted by you:
(1) because he engaged in terrorist activity, and (2) because he assisted or otherwise participated in the persecution of others on account of their political opinion. Even his own account of his actions established that he assisted or otherwise participated in the persecution of persons on account of their political opinion.
Since when does a military coup become “terrorist activities?” And does the US court have jurisdiction of defining a military coup(s) overseas as a “terrorist activity?” In that case, how is the US supporting Musharraf, who came to power via a military coup in 1999? Shouldn’t Musharraf fall under the same definition of being a “terrorist?”
Secondly, your comment:”If Congressman McDermott or others feel the death penalty is the issue, they should lobby to get Mohiuddin to serve out a life sentence in the United States for his crimes - not set him free for having committed murder.”
How can America prosecute/penalize for a reported crime committed overseas (whence it does not involve US interest), whether murder or not? Does Mohiuddin fall under US Penal Code? Remember, his case to the US court is for an asylum application based on facts occurring in BD during 1975?
No court (whether criminal or immigration) in the US has any legal (or otherwise) jurisdiction to determine/conclude whether Mohiuddin had (or had not) committed murder in BD. Then, how can you?
Am I making any sense to you (by virtue of logic or otherwise)? Please read the 9th court’s verdict again and respond?
I thank you sincerely for your kind attention.
June 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 pm
To All Who Is Presenting Their Blogs/Comments Here:
Look, the issue is not whether the trial in BD was fair or not. Right now, Mohiuddin’s deportation is based on simply a single fact, being: whether the US Immigration and the 9th Circuit Court believes his claim (appeal) to be valid. Obviously, they have rejected his petition. That is how courts work. We all know, courts operate on the basis of evidence, arguments, counter-evidence and the “judicial interpretation” of the “existing law of the land.”
Should you wish to disagree with me, please do so. Since I welcome it. Let’s take another (and albeit a hypothetical) approach to this issue–what would our response, feedback be had it been one of us? Simply, and from an extreme impartial standpoint put each of you in his shoes (forget his name is Mohiuddin).
Consider three facts within the same context–1. you’re Mohiuddin’s lawyer, 2. you’re Mohiuddin’s prosecuting lawyer, 3. you’re the presiding judge in the 9th Circuit Court.
Once those three “stands” can be taken by each of us here individually and from an absolutely impartial perspective we can truly come up with a verdict. Since courts don’t operate on the basis of emotions, it operates on the basis of evidence, etc. (as mentioned above) except in the case of BD where courts are indeed under the pressure of the existing govt. in power.
Evidence in point: Agartala Shorojontro Maamla (Pakistan vs Sheikh Mujibur Rahman). just look at the harassment the SC justice (Mr. Chaudhury) is currently been subjected to in the hands of a military dictator?
Need I say more…..?
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:11 pm
Shiblee from #14, you say you are “appalled” at the evidence cited by me. Feel free to be appalled. However, I quoted directly from the US 9th circuit court of appeals decision denying Mohiuddin’s petition. If you are appalled by their decision, feel free to contact them.
Here again is a helpful link to the 9th circuit’s decision:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/coa/memdispo.nsf/pdfview/022307/File/03-74603.PDF
You asked “Since when does a military coup become “terrorist activities?””
The 9th circuit’s decision was based firmly on US law. The 9th circuit, being a court of law, offered plenty of citations to back up their decision. Allow me to quote from their citation in the decision of what constitutes “terrorist activity” as defined by the United States:
If you have an issue with that, feel free to take it up with the US government.
You also wanted to know what jurisdiction the US courts have to determine what is “terrorist activity” overseas. Well, the US courts have total jurisdiction to define what the US considers “terrorist activity” when the case involves someone who is seeking redress from the United States courts. I am not sure why this would surprise you. You may disagree with the definition, but there is absolutely no question of jurisdiction here.
Finally, you argue that US courts have no jurisdiction to determine if someone committed murder overseas. The answer is, they dont need the jurisdiction. When you are seeking redress in US courts, the US courts simply need to make the determination whether Mohiuddin received due process and whether the trial was fair. They have made that determination. Once that determination is made, as the 9th circuit court noted, they can then rely on the original conviction. In fact the 9th circuit said exactly that in the decision:
The 9th circuit’s decision is a pretty solid one. That is why when Mohiuddin requested an en banc hearing he was denied. I am really sorry you are appalled by their decision.
Your arguments seem to suggest, as Jyoti pointed out, that since the US has no jurisdiction and since Bangladeshi justice is corrupt, then anyone who commits a crime in Bangladesh is immune from prosecution. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your logic, please clarify.
June 4th, 2007 at 1:38 am
I check into the Ahmed website http://www.freedin.org/ every day or so and I see that Amnesty International is now supporting Ahmed’s efforts to get into Canada.
AI Canada has made their appeal to Findley and other members of the Canadian govt. I found that appeal on Ahmed’s homepage.
I think he should be sent to Canada because I’ve always been against the death penalty and I don’t trust the US or Bangladesh in this case.
Bangladesh is one of the most corrupt countries in the world and has been for decades. In Bangladesh they settle their political differences in the street and dark jail cells.
That’s just not my opinion that’s the conclusion of the US State Dept, United Nations, Amnesty International and Transparency International.
I really doubt Ahmed got a fair trial in Bangladesh in 1997, not just because Hasina was behind the whole thing, but because Ahmed wasn’t even there to defend himself.
How can you give the death penalty to someone who wasn’t even at his own trial. Life in prison maybe, but the death penalty?
And the US is always trigger happy to label someone a “terrorist” when they want to get rid of him. They do that because they want to be able to tell the American people- hey, look how we’re “protecting” you.
If Ahmed is such a “terrorist” why aren’t they treating him like one? I heard on the radio how Ahmed is still in the lowest security area of the detention center. He’s been there since his arrest in March. This is the same security area holding a bunch of poor Mexicans who overstayed their visas.
How much of a terrorist can Ahmed be if he’s being held with a bunch of gardeners being deported south of the border?
I say send him to Canada and be done with it.
June 4th, 2007 at 5:16 am
I just had a look at the freedin.org website. I don’t understand the site’s assertion that Mr. Mohiuddin will be hanged in public. I can appreciate the fact that the site’s goal is to prevent Mr. Mohiuddin to be sent back to Bangladesh but why use lies and disinformation.
Bangladesh does not carry out hanging in public.
The offending line from freedin.org homepage:
“An innocent man is about to be deported and hanged in public”
June 4th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Steve Liberali, you say:
I should remind you that Mohiuddin has been duly convicted of a crime in a trial which the US State Department as well as US courts have deemed free and fair. You have offered not a shred of evidence that Mohiuddin is innocent of the crimes he has been convicted of. Instead, you are telling us how corrupt Bangladesh is and how “trigger happy” the US is. Please take a look at the actual statistics on how many people are executed per year in Bangladesh and you may find that Bangladesh is not as barbaric as you may think.
Here’s a helpful post I wrote that used Amnesty International’s statistics to disavow you of your impressions of Bangladesh as bloodthirsty:
http://www.docstrangelove.com/2007/04/04/the-death-penalty-by-the-numbers-the-united-states-bangladesh-and-texas/
Incidentally, in 2006 Bangladesh executed one person. Mohiuddin’s co-consprators who were sentenced to death in 1998 and who have been in custody in Bangladesh are yet to be executed. Any notion that there is a rush to the gallows in this case is utter nonsense.
Finally, about Amnesty International Canada’s support to give Mohiuddin sanctuary to Canada. They not once state that Mohiuddin’s conviction is in doubt. Their support is solely on the basis of being against the death penalty. Here is the complete text of Amnesty’s letter:
June 5th, 2007 at 7:28 am
I have been following the case of Mohiuddin Ahmed from the start, and I must first comment on the lack of critical thinking I am seeing in many of the posts, all of which seem to be written by reasonably intelligent people.
Mash, why are only statistics regarding executions being referenced to? It would be due diligence to also report on the ill treatment of prisoners and prison center conditions. According to a US State dept country report regarding HR, 2005, ….”the record of human rights remained poor and the government continued to commit numerous serious abuses…including, but not limited to politically motivated killings, extensive government corruption, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, and so forth..
Also note, BSEHR and press reports substantiate statistics of custodial deaths - 76 people died in prison and 210 people died while in the custody of police.
Regardless of one’s opinion regarding the innocence/guilt of Ahmed, the simple fact is the government of Bangladesh IS corrupt. Look at the present state of affairs.! The 15 senator letter written to BD urging action to end the corruption is evident enough that any rational thinker would conclude there is absolutely no way such a politically charged case can and HAD received due process.. whether it be 2007, 1996 or 1975.
I do not believe Ahmed received a fair trial.
Based on historical reports, Mujib’s government transformed into a dictatorship leaving absolutely no democratic process left to the people of Bangladesh, resulting in a military coup. If the country and the government wanted justice, why was there a time lapse of 21 years to try the case? In the late 80’s, Bangladesh moved away from a military dictatorship which left a decade of elected governments, who could have pushed forward with the allegations of the “involved”. It appears to be clear that only after Hasina was elected in 1996,with her executive powers, she able to orchestrate a case regarding the military coup which resulted in her fathers death. As the trial was politically charged, there was not a clear investigation into the the allegations against Ahmed, who was not even there to defend himself. His attorney was government appointed and we all know how that proves to be ineffective, especially when there was no communication between Ahmed and his attorney in Bangladesh. And lets not forget the processions in the streets by AL before the final verdict - chanting, intimidating slogans regarding support for the defendants.
People were afraid for their lives to speak out and are still afraid due to political intimidation and denial of fair public trial.(see Amnesty, US State Dept reports).
So, I must say again that Ahmed’s family’s appeal to the people is not about the political history of Bangladesh moreso about the corrupt judicial system and the lack of due process. It is completely unfair for a man to be tried inabsentia resulting in a death sentence. It is also known Bangladesh will NOT re open the case if he is deported as the Bangladeshi courts do not allow a person convicted inabsentia to appeal their case.
I hope he is sent to Canada and resume a peaceful and happy life. And I pray for his family.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:18 am
Hala, you say that you do not believe the trial was fair. However, foreign observers who observed the trial, including the US State Department and Amnesty International, disagree with you. US courts that have reviewed the trial disagree with you. These arent “statistics” about Bangladesh, these are facts specific to this case.
You also say that it is “completely unfair for a man to be tried in absentia resulting in a death sentence”. If the defendent voluntarily flees the trial, there is nothing unfair about it. I will give you two famous examples. One is of Ira Einhorn who fled the US for France after murdering his girlfriend - he was tried and found guilty in absentia. The other is the trial in absentia of prominent Nazi Martin Bormann at the International Military Tribunal at Nuremburg - he was sentenced to death in absentia.
Emotional arguments notwithstanding, the trial’s fairness has not been called into question by any credible organization or government that observed it.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
More elaborate explanation on this is here
June 6th, 2007 at 9:05 pm
Dear Folks– I have left similar posts, Mash, on other sites where you post. I have been Din Ahmed’s neighbor for a number of years in Venice. He is not a right wing ideologue. He loves his country and had the guts to serve in both the military and the diplomatic corps, under whatever government existed, as do our most progressive politicians and military officers serving under George W. Bush. I know Din and I believe him when he says he was not at the site where the prime minister was killed, and that it was his understanding that the coup was to be peaceful, and he heard with abhorance about what actually happened. It was then his choice to stay in Bangladesh and serve, or to leave. He chose to stay and serve, as all of us choose to stay in America, because we love our country although it is now engaged in some of the most craven and bloodthirsty acts ever to be perpetrated on the world. Folks, I know that you take the positions you take because you want justice. Well, I do too, but I have no illusions that I can make a sound judgment about what is right and wrong in a place I know so little about. I should not be playing God, nor should the American judicial system. I believe Din should be sent to Canada, where he can live out his life with family he has there. To take a side in this conflict, in which all sides are accused of corruption and murder, depending on whom you talk to, is a distraction from the problems here in our own country which is where we need to spend the bulk of our political energy. I am writing this because I know and respect Din Ahmed and I don’t want him executed for serving such a tragic country in the best way he knew how.
June 6th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Sheila, thanks for your opinion, but it is irrelevant and worthless. Your good neighbor also happens to be a good liar. That’s been established beyond doubt in the trial’s proceedings. Mohiuddin thought it was a peaceful coup… and he was far away from the scene… yeah, Right!!!
Yes, the courts in Bangladesh have on occasions been corrupt, but that is true even for the US Supreme court, one of whose chief justices once lied to get confirmed. This particular trial, however, took place under broad daylight, and Mohiuddin had his chance to defend himself. The saddest truth is, he may not get hanged in spite of all his high crimes in the end, because the same “corrupt system” will actually let him go Scot-free! The signs are out there… judging by the fates of his fellow murderers and co-conspirators so far. Not to mention much bigger war-criminals that our govts (BD as well as US) protects from harm or injury. Somebody please shoot me … I cannot take this ignominy anymore!!!
June 6th, 2007 at 10:41 pm
Calling Din a terrorist does not make him a terrorist. Deporting him to certain execution in Bangladesh does not befit a country founded on the premise of offering freedom and justice for all. Let Bin be deported to Canada and face whatever legal investigation is required. He deserves fair treatment.
June 7th, 2007 at 12:52 am
I don’t pretend to know all the facts of this case, but one thing is very apparent to me. The divergent opinions are so far apart, and the truths believed so opposed to one another, that the situation demands a calm, reasoned reconsideration. The rhetoric is heated, emotions are high, and everyone wants “justice.” What form that takes should be considered very carefully. As civilized people, we must do all we can to ensure that we have done all we can to dispel all doubts before we act.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:21 am
A lot of people (Kit25 for example) are saying that Mohiuddin will face ‘certain execution’ in Bangladesh. As Mash and others have said, this is rubbish. Mohiuddin’s co-defendants are still very much alive, their case is still in the appeal process, and if the appeal process through the court is exhausted, they can plead for clemency. So please don’t buy into the ‘Mohiuddin will die as soon as he sets foot in Dhaka’ nonsense.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:06 am
Hala (20): If the country and the government wanted justice, why was there a time lapse of 21 years to try the case?
This is an extraordinary statement, betraying a rather convoluted thought process. Let’s quickly go through the history. Khondoker Mushtaque Ahmed, president of the regime that took over after the 15 Aug massacre, issued a decree that granted the coupmakers immunity from prosecution. This decree was issued under martial law, and in April 1979, a constitutional amendment was passed to retrospectively approve all martial law decrees, and the Indemnity Ordinance became a law. No government repelled this law until 1996. So no one could try the case. This is well known history, and Hala seems to know most of it. So why raise it at all?
Perhaps the implicit argument is, if people wanted to try the case then they would have elected a government that would repeal the law. This is partly true. One side in Bangladeshi politics repeatedly said they’d repeal the law if elected, and this side was not elected in genuine elections in 1981 and 1991.
But so what? This doesn’t make the law itself any more morally right. Let’s get it straight, the Indemnity Act was a law that said that
murderers cannot be prosecuted. Hala talks about the rights of the Mohiuddin family and others languishing in Bangladeshi jails and so on, so I presume Hala believes in some sort of fundamental civil rights. A law that says that a murderer cannot be tried at all surely violates any rights-based principle.
Rights and justice are indivisible and not subject to democratic majority. If you believe otherwise then please say so explicitly. But in that case, don’t raise concerns about due process in Bangladeshi courts and so on.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:42 am
Folks, I need to address some inaccurate points being brought up regarding the fairness of Din’s trial and the due process some blindly believe he received.
I will pre-empt the following argument by first saying whichever your personal opinion is about his innocence or guilt, Din still did not get a fair trial. HE WAS TRIED IN ABSENTIA. Upon conviction, Din had an extremely limited amount of time to legally file an appeal. In order to file the appeal, he had to have been in BD. Let me ask ALL of you who cast judgement so quickly, if you were convicted of a crime not committed and sentenced to death, knowing full well how corrupt BD is, would you attempt to go back and fight a system which inevitably would still send you to your death? and what about the safety of your family? How many people in BD stay quiet because of fear and not get involved because it might compromise the lives of family members?
And the men who are still sitting in the prison awaiting their death for their supposed role? They had the chance to appeal because they were PHYSICALLY there. another reason why they have not been executed is because the judicial system in BD cannot find a panel of judges to rehear the trial because they are too embarressed, and probably afraid for themselves and family. Oh yes, lets not forget the country has bigger issues such as Ex-PMs being investigated and charged with graft,extortion, bribery and murder charges.
As far as the US deciding Din’s case was fair..where did the evidence come from? It came from the BD government! Testimony from deposed witnesses were missing. Lost in translation. does that constitute fairness?
June 7th, 2007 at 5:22 am
Hala, your bias is showing. Let’s start with this statement of yours. You say:
You say “supposed” role? Let’s examine that for a second. One of those convicted is Farook Rahman. Everyone who is breathing knows he was the coup leader. If you are suffering from amnesia, let me present to you Farook’s own words. He gave an interview to the London Sunday Times on May 30, 1976 bragging about killing Sheikh Mujib. The title of the interview was “I helped to kill Mujib, dare you to put me in jail?”. Feel free to read Farook’s own words in the interview here:
http://www.docstrangelove.com/2007/04/07/from-the-mind-of-a-murderer/
You can see the actual Sunday Times article at the link above. Well, he dared Bangladesh to put him on trial, and a trial he got. I guess the moral of the story is that you probably should not be bragging about murder if you want to try to deny it later in life.
But the trial didnt convince you even though those who make it their business to monitor trials found the trials to be fair. I suppose Farook’s own words about his guilt will not convince you.
Incidentally, I have more if you like. For example, when Farook and the other Majors arrived in Bangkok in November 1975, they gave a bunch of interviews to the foreign press bragging about how they could have turned the streets of Dhaka to blood with their tanks. They also bragged about killing Mujib. Luckily the Washington Post and other newspapers make it their business to archive their newspapers. But I am sure you can explain them away as well.
From the Washington Post (November 6, 1975):
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost_historical/access/120248825.html?dids=120248825:120248825&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&date=Nov+6%2C+1975&author=By+Lewis+M.+SimonsWashington+Post+Foreign+Service&pub=The+Washington+Post++(1974-Current+file)&edition=&startpage=A14&desc=Four+Former+Aides+of+Mujib+Slain
History is a bitch, aint it?
June 7th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
Given the unanimous opinion of the pro-”Din” responders here that Bangladeshi courts (or all courts outside of US, for that matter?) are corrupt, the govt(s) is (are) corrupt (and therefore all the evidence produced is false), and also that the US is only country founded on fair treatment and freedom for all, perhaps all these other govts should follow Fidel Castro’s example and export every criminal convicted of any crime within their jurisdiction to the US. That would be a very logical and wise thing to do, don’t you think?
I’d go one step further, and start a campaign for all the poor souls suffering in Bangladeshi jails. Maybe we can start a new VISA Lottery program for all the convicts in Bangladeshi courts. Why the special treatment for murderer Mohiuddin aka Din only?
June 8th, 2007 at 6:49 am
Mash - (#21) - I think those examples are like comparing apples to oranges. First of all, Martin Bormann had a position in the 3rd reich. The Nazis and Hitler!! He made sure the orders of “relocating” prisoners to Auschwitz were carried through. As far as the International Military Tribunal, the court was set up involving several countries - France, US, UK, etc.. and discussions about how to try war criminals were done 2 years prior to the end of the war..I dont believe BD has anything COMPARABLE to a system such as the IMT. Poor example. We were talking about a world war as opposed to a coup to rid BD of a dictator and his private para military army.
Mash -
- (#30) - you supply an archived link to a Washington Post article - and I am sorry, but it does not cite the article in its entirety. As a suggestion, if you elect to forward viewers to an article, and reference it as a point of your argument, I think its only fair to allow readers to view the article in its full text. Nevertheless, I am not stating my opinion with regard to the involvement of Farook and others, I certainly do not have amnesia - My intentions are not to discuss Farooks involvement. I already know of his involvement. By my using “supposed” is more of a politically correct gesture to not detract from the discussion of Ahmed. I digress..your reference to the article - I do not believe Ahmed has ever issued statements to ANY newspaper..I am not speaking of the other majors - I am only speaking of Ahmed. He was never politically affiliated with ANY party - his intent was to serve the people of BD and not the pathetic leaders BD has had thus far.
NirBashito -(#31) - “…I’d go one step further, and start a campaign for all the poor souls suffering in Bangladeshi jails. Maybe we can start a new VISA Lottery program for all the convicts in Bangladeshi courts. Why the special treatment for murderer Mohiuddin aka Din only?..”
Well, Lets hope someone starts paying attention to the prisoners - I am sure there is a good number who are innocents, and those who are guilty should still be treated with some dignity.
There has been no special treatment given to Ahmed’s case. He is fighting against a country’s government and its judicial system, well known for its lack of transparency and deviant corruption.
June 8th, 2007 at 8:17 am
Hala says
There has been no special treatment given to Ahmed’s case. He is fighting against a country’s government and its judicial system, well known for its lack of transparency and deviant corruption.
Well, with this logic any person convicted in Bangladesh can flee the country and claim political asylum in US/Canada for supposed injustice? Every convicted killer, rapists, murdered can flee the country and evade justice and ask for political asylum. What makes Mohiuddin Ahmed special? Isn’t it giving blank check to the criminals? You couldn’t site a single reference or example of why you thought the trial of Mohiuddin was unfair other than the fact that he was tried in absentia. The fact that he was tried in absentia is because Mohiuddin chose not to defend himself and avoided justice.
June 8th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Hala, I quoted from the Washington Post article and forwarded you to a link where you could get the article if you doubted my quoting of the article. Archived articles in the Washington Post give you a free preview and cost you a few dollars to download the entire article - available at the link.
But, since you have obviously not downloaded the article, here is the downloaded article as a public service:
http://www.docstrangelove.com/uploads/four%20former%20aides%20of%20mujib%20slain.pdf
You also say:
Obviously, if you are going to use the word “supposedly” those who read your comments will understand them as they are written. How is casting doubt on the convictions a “politically correct gesture”? Your whole thesis here is casting doubt on the convictions - and you have painted with a very broad claiming the trial was unfair. You have used words like “supposedly” to case doubt on the convictions without providing any evidence.
You also make the absurd claim that:
Are you kidding me? Mohiuddin has lost in court. However, he has lobbied a Congressman into introducing a private bill on his behalf? Do you know what a private bill is? Its a bill written to benefit one person as opposed to a group of people. The bill is designed to give Mohiuddin a green card by taking one away from other Bangladeshi applicants. The bill wants to give a green card to Mohiuddin in spite of the fact that he was been found by the US courts to be involved in terrorist activities.
I am not sure what else you call special treatment?!? How many people do you think have a private bill in the US congress under their name? What about all those illegal immigrants, who unlike Mohiuddin have not been convicted of murder, who desperately need relief from deportation? I dont see private bills for them?
In the end this bill will obviously fail. If the President of the United States were to grant a green card to a person deemed to have committed terrorist activities by an American court, if the president were to sign this in the midst of a war on terror, I think the American people would demand some answers.
Your claims about this case should be based on at least a tangential connection to reality please.
June 8th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Only 34 comments/counter-comments? This debate will go on and on (I see)!
Apparently, the problem is this–we Bangladeshis can’t ever agree on anything. Sorry to say it, but what we lack is 1. Consensus, 2. National unity (i.e., on issues related to our country, nation and its well-being, etc.). I wonder if we will. It is good to disagree since many views present many perspectives, no doubt.
However, there is a thing called agreement. How much of constructive result(s)have evolved from disunity and disagreements?
Alas, amongst Bangalis in 1857 we had Mir Jafaar, 1952 we had Muslim League, 1971 Razaakaar, Al-Badar, 2007 Jamaat, et al. Are we a nation of people who can never agree? How can we ever move forward.
Din is nothing but a small issue. There are many larger issues our intellectuals politicians and even so-called “elites” can not agree.
I am not claiming my view is the only view or even the right view. But, at some point we need to agree on certain things–even if it costs us our own humility and compromise.
Will any one here agree with me, on this…?
June 8th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Mash…you are correct. Ahmed WAS tried in absentia because he chose not to go back to Bangladesh. But let me ask you…if you were charged with the murder of a president…and you had already applied for political asylum in the US…would you have left the safety of the US, and that asylum process….to go back to the politically charged….. Awami controlled…mobs in the street….trial against you?
June 8th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Hala, “fighting against a country’s government and its judicial system, well known for its lack of transparency and deviant corruption,” did you mean the US, the Dick [Cheney], his Halliburton, and Guantanamo? Bravo! For speaking up, finally! About time! Now let’s see you in action, and follow up on your words!
As we say in Bangla, only a “ratan” (or a genuine crook) recognizes another. So, while the 30 or so CIA agents are being tried IN ABSENTIA in Italy for their crimes, perhaps we can remind ourselves which govt is the most corrupt, in violation of the most basic HR laws recognized by the world incl. the Geneva Conventions, employing a privatized army of mercenaries for torture in Baghdad and only God knows where else, assassinating heads of govt it doesn’t like, (Does Chile’s Allende ring a bell?), not to mention hundreds of thousands of dollars bribed to its law-makers in the name of lobbying.
It just dawned on me, perhaps the CIA *was really* behind the conspiracy to kill Bangabandhu, which explains so many of the American bleeding hearts for Mohiuddin!
June 8th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
Steve, if I had committed a cold blooded murder and had gotten away with it for 21 years, I’d flee too when a democratically elected government finally paved the way so the courts could try the murder case.
It must have sucked knowing that the military governments that had protected him for this long were no longer in power.
Mohiuddin’s days of making a mockery of justice are likely coming to an end. Nothing you have said or Mohiuddin’s defense has claimed in trying to reinvent history changes the overwhelming evidence and historical record of his crimes. This was no petty theft - this was a very public and well known crime he committed.
I guess the killer Majors should probably not have taken up residence in Banghababhan (presidential palace) for 3 months after the murders, surrounded by their tanks, if they were going to later try to feign innocence. I guess they shouldnt have packed up and took off to Bangkok on November 3, 1975 if they didnt want to be known as the coup plotters. I guess they shouldnt have killed four national leaders in jail before fleeing if they didnt want to be known to the world.
Like I said, history is a bitch.
June 8th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
The following e-mail has been reached to my e-mail yesterday.Have a look:
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Hussain Mahbub Contr 95 ABW/CEV
Date: 07-Jun-2007 20:10
Subject: History Lesson
To: engrsdg@gmail.com
I read your email on Major Mohiuddin’s deportation. After reading your
email I get the impression that you know very little (or misinformed)
about socio-political landscape of Bangladesh when Mujibur Rahman was
assaisinated. Please read the history carefully, especially how
autocratic Mr. Rahman became before being murdered. Is not this fact
that he
1. Introduced one-party political system to silence the opposition and
hang-on in power indefinitely.
2. Dissolved the parliament
3. Suspended constitution and ruled by decree
4. When there was national army and police force were there formed his
party militia called Rakhi Bahini that terrorized and killed thousands
who opposed his rule
5. Allowed his own son (was arrested for armed bank robbery) and nephew
to terrorize the nation.
6. Arranged extra judicial killing of a prominent underground leftist
leader named Siraz Sikder and bragged about his achievement in the
parliament by shouting, “Where is Siraz Sikder today”.
If your concious can justify these criminal activities, please go ahead
and glorify him and his achievements. Remember, you did not live in
Bangladesh when all these happened, I did.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
In 1975, the President of Bangladesh, Mujibur Rahman declared a single party rule under the “The National Party”, and he granted himself dictatorial special powers to control the judicial system. In addition, Mujibar Rahman carved out for himself and his special authority to authorize warrantless searches and arrests of political opponents who were then referred to as “subversives”.
specialpowersact1974.pdf
http://www.freedin.org/freedin.org/Important%20Documents_files/specialpowersact1974.pdf
nationalparty.pdf
http://www.freedin.org/freedin.org/Important%20Documents_files/nationalparty.pdf
To help maintain his dictatorship, Rahman created the Rakhi Bahini, a special para-military private army whose main activity was to round up and eliminate Rahman’s political opponents. The Bahini swore personal loyalty to only Rahman. In 1974 Rahman granted the Bahini full constitutional immunity from prosecution for any of their activities.
bahiniimmunity.pdf
http://www.freedin.org/freedin.org/Important%20Documents_files/bahiniimmunity.pdf
This is the legacy of Sheik Mujib.
Rouben
June 8th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
Sushanto, for the edification of those who claim to have lived through it and chose to remain ignorant (and yet give us pseudo History Lessons): Mujib was forced to impose the Emergency, as it has been done countless times by many other heads of state, democratically elected or not. Few died as a result. Certainly no one had to pay the price of the life one’s eight year old son. The stories spread by JSD terrorists and their Jamaati infiltrators about Mujib’s son robbing banks, etc. have been proved to be false. Bangabandhu himself was horrified at the killing of Siraj Sikder by some rogue police officers, and his utterrence about Sikder’s failed tactics is the most famous and egregious misquotation in our history. Only shows the pro-Pakistani elements in full-force of their anti-71 propaganda.
And yeah, I too lived in Bangladesh when all that happened. Wished I could disband the whole Bangladesh Army for all the petty thieves and smugglers and robbers it has produced, at tax-payers’ expenses.
If Mujib deserved to die because of his political decision, then most of the commissioned officers in Bangladesh’s armed forces ought face a firing squad… for their support of army rule and suspension of the constitution, time after time. Not to mention countless additional murders and assassinations by coup, counter-coup, and lately, torture of civilians and our fellows adivasis.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
Of course - when you ask the Awamis about the post-independent chaos, destruction of democracy by Sheikh Mujib who established a totalitarian dictatorship with one party rule, there response is that Bangladesh, as a result of suffering from nine months war and the destruction that it had caused, they needed to rehabilitate millions of refugees returning to Bangladesh. The deteriorating of the law and order situation, etc., meant that task faced by the Mujib government was too gigantic and needed time for a solution.
When Sheikh Hasina was confronted after her speech at the London School of Economics in October 1997 during the question time on the same accusation, she replied that the newspapers were banned because they were spreading false information particularly about the 1974 famine. She also said that BAKSAL was created as a forum to enable smaller parties to have a voice in the political process ….oh come on…guys…. there was no real opposition - no BNP - and that Awami League was the only big party. Sheikh Hasina blamed the 1974 famine on the world economic upheaval that resulted from the oil price rise in the 1973, rather then on her father, Sheikh Mujib who was the ruler of Bangladesh then.
Rouben
June 8th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
Quote from article by Dr. M Ahmedullah - Eastern Voice 2007.
“Commentators, politicians and foreign diplomats often lament at the endless politics of conflict in Bangladesh and express their inability to understand why, in a country that has no significant ethnic, linguistic, or religious divide, there exists such a divisive and destructive political process. It is suggested that as there is no real reason for this ruinous political cycle in Bangladesh, politicians should realise this and change the way that they practice politics for the greater good of the country. Therefore, political parties, politicians and their supporters should shun
their destructive politics and start being tolerant towards each other and constructive in politics to solve the urgent problems of the country.”
June 8th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Rouben, as I mentioned in my own blog in response to your comments about your father, if you are trying to claim that he is innocent of murder, it probably doesnt help your case if you try to also justify the murders. In one breath you say your father did not support the coup, and in another breath you try to discredit the murder victim.
As I have also pointed out, you creating a blog called “Revolution of Bangladesh in 1975″ also sounds like you, like your father, are a supporter of the coup. Of course, in your father’s case, not only was he a supporter, but a plotter.
Check here for Rouben’s blog: http://www.technorati.com/blogs/1975couprevolutionbangladesh.blogspot.com
It kind of makes your argument that Mohiuddin did not know about nor support the coup sound kind of ludicrous. The private bill that McDermott is pushing on his behalf says Mohiuddin “had no knowledge of, nor did he support, the violent coup that erupted that night.” Kind of sounds a little silly, doesnt it?
Methinks you are not helping your father’s cause by open support of the coup and attacking the murder victim.
June 8th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Rouben, I feel for you. When you talk about Mujib’s legacy, however, you are so far out of your depth, there’s no point in discussing the issue with you with any hope of resolution — not only do you not have a clue about Bangladesh’s history; your vision is also clouded by your own personal connection to one of the perpetrators of the most infamous assassination of our times. Just one request: don’t try to smear Mujib. I fully understand your fight for your own father’s safety; but he committed a crime, and he knew it (and his diplomatic missions were at the behest of his fellow criminals: I’d be really careful in using those in his defense) — and Mohiuddin thought he’d get away with it. You and your family seem to be serious denial. So, here’s a silver lining for you: even the Razakar Moitya Nizami became a full minister in our govt. So, who knows, your father will one day become Bangladesh’s president! Viva Din (just please don’t quote me)!
June 8th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
My response was to add to #39.
I dont support the killing of anybody, and in no way am I justifying anything. All I am doing is shedding some light on the situation during those times. As Sheikh Hasina and her team have created negative propoganda against my father for the last 30 years, and continue to do so. Some need to voice there thoughts withought Awami Intimidation!
Once agin I would like to point out - Bangladesh was in distress under Mujibar Rahman; A dictatorship was flourishing under the National Party rule as enforced by Sheikh Mujibur’s para-military forces; The Rakhi Bahini.
Sheikh Hasina and her Awami league unlawfully repealed the constitution in 1996, and created a kangaroo court in violation of the Bangladeshi constitution.
My fathers Bangladeshi lawyer who represented him in the in absentia trial, was disinterested and ineffective at best, or biased in favor of the prosecution at worst;
The Bangladeshi government tampered with evidence which was presented to the US immigration court so as to compel a mandatory denial of asylum.
Revenge has been, and continues to be, the driving force behind the prosecution, rather than the pursuit of justice.
It is fundamentally wrong, no matter where you sit on the death
penalty question, to execute someone, who was never even in court during the trial and never had any contact with his court appointed lawyer.
Rouben
June 8th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
FYI - My father was never a member of the good old boys club.
Mash lived thru the independence in 1971, when my father was in a Pakistani concentration camp. Thus, he was not able to participate in the fight for independence.
Why would coup plotters want a 28 year old Major who was not a part of them (freedom fighters) be in the inner circle.
The coup was carried out by 2 regiments, Armored core and Artillary. My father had been transfered into bengal lancers which was a squadron in the armored core. He did not start his military carreer in the armored core regiment. He was in the service core, and as he was held in a concentration camp in pakistan till 73; He was an outsider transfered to a new regiment. How could he have been part of the plot. He was following orders manning a road block1.5 miles from the presidents home.
June 8th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Rouben Bhai
You have to take any one way:
1. Either justify the murder of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his entire family by your father
or
2. Justify that your father was not involved in the murder.
Dont act as you are acting now at both side.
Its a request from me. Otherwise you will also be a shamed person.
June 9th, 2007 at 3:51 am
Dear Shiblee Ahmed,
I share your frustration. My country is very divided on many issues.
Thank you for your gracious tone and thoughtful insights.
Freudenfreude
June 15th, 2007 at 3:01 am
At last came the good news. The federal judge ruled to lift the TRO on the deportation based on his lack of jurisdiction. The deportation order stands and Mohiudding has been given 24 hours - will be sent back as soon as tomorrow evening (Thursday).
June 15th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Rouben,
What were the crimes of Bangabandhu’s family? You know 8-yr old child, pregnant women, old woman etc. Sheikh Moni’s family? Do you know how your dad’s buddies killed Moni’s wife? Abdur Rab Serniabat’s family? The top four national leaders in prison who were murdered by your father and other cold-blooded murderers on Nov 3, 1975? You didn’t shed any light on that.
June 15th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Shiblee Ahmed (#4, #13, #14, #15 and #35),
Are you the same person who sent the following note to Mohiuddin that’s currently being displayed in comment section of freedin.org?
*****
Dear Mr. Mohiuddin:
Please accept my salaam and best wishes in the time of your utmost crisis.
I can not even begin to empathize with your cause and the plight for justice. Although I have lived in Los Angeles continuously from 1981-96 (yes, 25 years) I was never aware of your story. I can claim I was fairly active in the socio-cultural aspects of the Bangladeshi community and maintained a fairly decent amount of rapport within the community. Surely, our paths would have crossed in all those years. This only attests to the fact that you have maintained a fairly low profile, taking care of your family and the loved ones. Sir, please understand that I view you as a patriotic Bangladeshi who has rightfully served his motherland when called for by the government and to the best of his abilities. I can assure you, I am praying for you to Allah Subhanutalah. Mr. Mohiuddin, I completely understand that this is neither the time nor may you have the opportunity to respond to this mail. However, I do believe this–Allah is most merciful and Allah watches over and helps those who’re honest, maintain their Imaan and integrity. These are the biggest virtues any human can possess and Allah Himself respects those humans. My sincere regrets that I am not physically in Los Angeles right now, I would offer you my assistance in any form you deemed necessary.
My prayers will be with you, always. Please pray to Allah, since He is the most Merciful, most Gracious.
Sincere regards. Shiblee Ahmed
*****
So….. you view Mohiuddin as “a patriotic Bangladeshi who has rightfully served his motherland” and you would offer your “assistance in any form” that he “deemed necessary”. That explains your comments.
June 15th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Rouben,
I’m not a supporter of the Death penalty myself but I have to agree with alot of the writers here. Expressing the negative aspects of Sheikh Mujib’s rule does not justify his assassination. Now, I don’t know if your father is innocent or not because just like you I was just a little kid back in 1975. But here is one question that I have been wondering about:
1. It was a well known fact that your dad would face some trouble if AL ever came to power. I’m sure your dad knew that. My own fupa worked with your dad in Baghdad in the 90s and even back then he mentioned to me that your dad could possibly face criminal charges in Bangladesh if AL ever came to power. If he is truly innocent, why is it that he never tried to clear his name until now? Why is it that this vocal publicity of innocence had to happen only now after he’s caught? I don’t blame your dad for not going to his own trial but you guys had about 20 years before AL came to power in the mid 90s and also a good 6 or so years after AL left power, to prove your dad’s innocence.
Even the CBC news reporter mentioned that he doesn’t understand why your family didn’t go vocal about this much earlier. My own conscious would tell me to go screaming and appealing to every world leader immediately to help me clear my name if I was wrongfully convicted. But the fact is your dad chose to hide and stay quiet with the hope that he would never get caught. I’m still hoping your dad gets a chance for appeal in Dhaka with the current government. If he’s innocent, he needs to stand up and defend himself rather than hide in Canada with a question mark next to him for ever.
June 15th, 2007 at 9:09 pm
I am very glad to hear the news that atlast that culprit …. is sending back. I dont know why people r so concerned about that ,……..!
June 16th, 2007 at 2:21 am
A few things first - I do not support the death penalty and I think it would serve Mohiuddin well to rot in a BD prison than to be mercifully executed.
It is blasphemous to claim that he served his country well. As a uniformed officer it was his duty to serve the elected PM rather than listen to a bunch of cowardly army majors whose ambitions knew no bounds and who took upon themselves the ignoble role to change an elected government. It is called mutiny and the standard treatment for all such soldiers is a swift court martial - in practically all countries, followed normally by a firing squad.
Elsewhere Rouben wrote that his father was in a Pakistani concentration camp. I am sorry but he was never in a concentration camp. Those were Pakistani repatriation camps where people lived in cramped quarters but faced no undue dangers and were treated with respect and dignity. All Bangladeshi soldiers and officers were provided a monthly subsistence allowance. I should know because I was in one such camp for about 15 months.
Any “proofs” provided by his supporters about the dire state of BD affairs during Mujib’s time are irrelevant. Nothing can justify the execution of an elected official, his entire family and other relatives. A coup attempt is punishable by death.
Mohiuddin deserves no mercy. If I were him, I would accept my mistakes and beg the BD people for mercy. Only then maybe some will pity him.
His arrogance and attempts to rewrite history and distort facts and even to justify his actions are shameful and are earning him more enemies than he wants.
It is time to think of God and accept the truth as a man.
June 16th, 2007 at 3:35 am
Now one being sent back, raise your voice to deport others, who are hiding in Canada. It will be difficult for Government of Canada to ignore Bangladeshi community anymore.
June 17th, 2007 at 1:32 am
#55
Mr. Reza:
“It is called mutiny and the standard treatment for all such soldiers is a swift court martial - in practically all countries, followed normally by a firing squad.”
In reference to your above blanket and sweeping statement, please be advised that the following military rulers have come to “power” in the immediate past history: Field Marshal Ayub Khan, Maj Gen Ziaur Rahman, General Z. Haq, General Augusto Pinochet, Gen. H. M. Ershad, Gen P. Musharraf, just to name a few. Plenty examples of military coup(s) abound all over the history of nations. nine months ago a military coup took place in neighbouring Thailand. Please read the history of military coup(s) before making a blanket statement as such you’ve made here.
It is one thing to be able to make such subjective comments on a blog, it is totally different to objectively analyze why these coup(s) take place, under what circumstances. Under what kind of a socio-economic-political scenario is the military of a nation compelled to take-over power.
Sorry sir, I can not agree with your blanket statement. Either you’re not well-read on history or somewhere you’re bias is influencing your assessment on military takeovers.
Please understand, democracy does not always work, not in all nations, certainly not under all circumstances. Should you wish, I will only be delighted to provide you with further examples. I can understand, you do not condone military take-overs, however, there are times when it becomes an absolute necessary. many nations have experienced this.
June 17th, 2007 at 3:16 am
Shiblee, you cited the following to buttress your “historical necessity” argument:
Please explain your argument that “there are times when it becomes an absolute necessary” to have a military takeover. I am not a historian, but am certainly a student of history. I know that it is a favorite argument of Pakistani dictators. See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Zia-ul-Haq#The_Doctrine_of_Necessity
It was also the rationale used by the 1975 coup plotters. Khondokar Mushtaque used the term in his speech to the nation after taking power in the coup. The Bangladesh Observer published an infamous editorial entitled “Historical Necessity” the following day. Read it here:
http://www.docstrangelove.com/uploads/19750816-historical_necessity.pdf
It is of course a self-serving argument used by those who have forcibly taken power. It is an argument almost invariably used to justify murder. It is the Menendez Brothers defense writ large.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyle_Menendez
It just doesnt hold water except in the mind of the perpetrator of the murder or the coup.
June 17th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
Dear Mr. Shiblee Ahmed,
I appreciate your efforts to entertain me with the historical necessity of coups. I wish you had delved a little deeper to see what happened (or is happening in case of Musharraf)to all these starry-eyed world changers. Does that tell you something? To me the conclusion is simple, any attempts to bypass the people with the purported goal of acting as their savior is doomed to fail. The masses are smart, they know what serves them best. You may want to read the articles by Ayaz Amir - himself a retired army officer, about Musharraf’s misguided attempts to save the nation (www.dawn.com)
Yes, there are coups that succeed and coups that fail but when ill-qualified people start taking the reins of the government in their own hands, in clear violation of the constitution and in clear contravention of their oaths, they deserve no pity.
I think your ilk has dug itself into a deep logical quagmire by trying to argue on one side that Mohiuddin was not even present at the site and then trying to assert that there was a historical necessity to change the state of affairs. You can’t have it both ways. Either he was trying to bring about major changes in the BD political scene, in which case the majority of Bangladeshis clearly do not share his view and he should head to the gallows with his head held high.
Or, he was standing a mile away, clearly shirking his obligations as a soldier to protect the constitution and its elected leaders. The punishment for that, as you very well know is not light either.
Your attempts to bring Allah into this discourse are really misguided (Based on your letter to the killer). Don’t you for a second think that Allah would punish an individual who killed innocent women and children. I fail to see how any sane individual, knowing all of Mohiuddin’s misdeeds can pray for him.
I will, however, agree that I do not know what Mohiuddin had in his heart on that fateful night. Maybe in the many years since then he has seen light and asked Allah Almighty for forgiveness. If not, he really should do that.
And Mash, I would really like to thank you for offering a very strong rebuttal to Shiblee’s arguments. The links provided are very logical and relevant.
———————————————
I just learned from BDnews24.com that Mohiuddin is en route to BD. Well, I am sure he will get enough time in a Dhaka death cell to ponder over his activities over the last 32 years. If he has any sense of decency left, he should seek forgiveness from the family of Sheikh Mujib and the people of BD.
May Allah Almighty show him light and give him the courage to face truth.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Mujib was a great personality. He was not allowed to live by some important Bengalis from Dacca. It is essential that for the sake of ruling a country to lead a progressive society some people even if distantly related to the crime must be given the ultimate punishment even if it takes 40 or 60 years. That will keep others opportunists who wish to highjack a nation at check in the future.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
I watched with pleasure the return of Mohiuddin on ATN Bangla. I will embrace added pleasure the day this convicted murderer is put to death.
The day, Mohiuddin and his partners carried out their evil plans, I saw the “Tohol Police (Police Patrol) trucks removing dead bodies from the Minto Road area, where some of the other victims were masacred. I still can’t forget the legs of some of those murdered victims hanging out of the small pickup trucks. I still get goose bumps when I have flashbacks of that moment. I was about ten years old at that time.
I strongly believe that the other convicted murderers who are hiding in other countries should also be deported back to Bangladesh.
What I saw that day was ghastly. Can you imagine how much more ghastly it is to the immediate family members of the victims?
I hope and wish that Mohiuddin along with his other comrades face the gallows soon.
Murder is murder. Enough excuses. Its time to implement the verdict of our motherland’s judicial system.
June 18th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
On your documents section it clearly shows that Mohiuddin is guilty. And then Some stupid government changed the constitution to save those. How could a country change the constitution to save some cold blooded killer. I don’t care if Sheikh Mujib was a dictator. I care that he was killed and Mohiuddin have to face the justice. And I just don’t understand why didn’t Mohiuddin face the court if he thinks he’s innocent? On his deportation I am happy and thanks to U.S.A. for doing the right thing by bringing Mohiuddin to the justice.
June 18th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
Rouben,
Your father lived almost a full life even after committing such a horrendous crime. You and your family should remember the victims of your father’s crime at this moment. That will give you solace. Remember Bangabandhu’s youngest son Russell: ten years old child; his two daughter-in-laws: pregnant housewives, his wife: an old woman; numerous other women, children, and innocent civilians who were killed on 15 Aug, 1975; murdered four national leaders in jail whose ethics, morality, determination, and leadership should be examples for all of us. Bangabandhu and those four leaders were true world-class leaders, but your father and his cohorts ended their lives and the hope of a budding nation in most gruesome way. You have lied so much and spread enough misinformation through various media outlets, it is time for you and your family to seek forgiveness from the families of the victims, the people of Bangladesh and above all from Almighty God. We can all move on after that. Let the healing process start.
June 18th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
It amazes me how some of you are talking like omniscient beings and are dead certain that Mr. Mohiuddin killed Sheikh Mujib and his family.
I have argued in this blog before about my doubts about witness testimony and trial proceedings of the trial, so I will not go into that again.
Let me just say that Mr. Mohiuddin may yet get to appeal his case to supreme court and there maybe a different outcome.
So hold your sarcasm and vengeance until he is actually hanged.
And BTW, there is nothing glorious about hanging a man whether he is a killer or not.
June 18th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
#63 “Bangabandhu and those four leaders were true world-class leaders,”
Mr. Sarkar:
Perhaps, to you the above is a very true statement. After all, we all have our own views, perspectives and beliefs. I, however, disagree. The economics, politics, corruption, famine of BD during 1972-75 tell us a different story. “World Class” leaders do not work a nation towards totalitarian regime (i.e. BAKSAL), leaders like Stalin do!
I can give you many examples, however, your mind is made up. No use attempting to change your mind. Just remember, history never fades away. Nor does history forgive anyone for their misdeeds–Mujib is an example, so is Indira, Bhutto, Ziaul Haque, Ziaur Rahman, et al.
If you wish to call all of them “world class” leaders it is your prerogative Sir, certainly no one else’s!
June 19th, 2007 at 1:11 am
I have been following this case very closely, and I have also read the blogoshpere very carefully and critically over the course of the last several months. Now, I have come to the following conclusions: (1) Bangladesh has been and continues to be a festering cesspool of human waste run by corrupt vermin; (2) Those in control of Bangladeshi politics have always navigated that cesspool through the use of murder, deceit, bribery; nepotism, and self-interest. Given my conclusions above, I find it impossible to believe that Mohuiddin or any of the majors could have received a fair trial, and arguments to the contrary disregard the inescapable conclusions #1 and #2.
This “caretaker” government has now opened a Pandora’s box which will test their ability to hide under floating excrement.
Pop some popcorn boys and girls, I assure you that this will be interesting.
Regarding Mohuiddin, my heart goes out to him and his family. He has been a pawn in the cesspool of Bangladesh politics.
June 19th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
To Hasib,
There is also nothing glorious about rewarding the killers by offering them lucrative foreign service jobs. Some of these murderers even served as ambassadors of Bangladesh. We have to consider the facts. If Mohiuddin did not participate, then why did he fly out of the country within hours of murdering the four leaders in prison on Nov 3, 1975? Why did dictator Zia has to pass shameful and barbaric indemnity bill in parliament to protect the killers? What was he afraid of? These guys are self-confessed killers. It has been an open secret to the whole country for a long time. We may disagree, but the gang leader Colonel Faruk, other murderers and witnesses mentioned Mohiuddin’s name many times in their testimonies and accounts. He was in the forefront. He talks defensively now because he got caught. If he was so innocent, why didn’t he appeal during his well-wisher Khaleda Zia’s last five-year rule? He did not, because evidence against him is too strong. It’s really an irony in a country where Zia, highly revered by many, killed tens of thousands of soldiers (mostly freedom fighters) just because they were part of units that allegedly participated in failed coup attempts. Zia ordered execution for the whole unit not considering who participated in the coup and who didn’t. Those very unfortunate guys didn’t get any chance to defend themselves in the court of law. But when it comes to Bangabandhu and all the other 15 Aug murder victims, Jail murder case, 71 war crime victims, we have to go through so many ordeals. Haire Bangladesh!
To Shiblee,
At least I did not call Khaleda Zia as world-class leader like Delwar Hossain Saeedi and many other mullahs, who consider her as one of the greatest Muslim women in history. One of my neighbors and uncle in Bangladesh, who has PhD and is a professor at a renowned university, always found Khaleda as genius as Rabindra Nath Tagore. He has long flowing beard and follows very strict conservative life style. What a shame. But somehow this type of hypocritical behavior is very normal for these people who fervently follow all outward sunnahs, but seriously lack the inner ones.
If you don’t want to respect the founding fathers of our nation properly, that’s also your choice, only yours. Using your same biased and flawed analysis (you probably don’t know that your mind is made up too), I can also conclude that history never fades and never forgives, example - Khuni Mohiuddin and his cohorts. Of course history never fades: Bangabandhu is going up to become the father of the nation, and Zia is going down to his proper place insha-Allah. Just curious - three of our Khulafa-e Rashedins were assassinated, do you think history didn’t forgive in those cases too?
I still haven’t got any response to a serious question – why were the women and children murdered? They did not have anything to do with BAKSAL. I know this one is very tough to sell. Somebody did not want to leave any bloodline of Bangabandhu. He didn’t want to take any chance. Hmm, who could that be? Rouben’s lie in this regard: They were killed in crossfire. Then how come the people in that house who were not related to Bangabandhu survived that?
Khuni Mohiuddin could not find a small place in the whole world, but in a condemned cell in Dhaka jail. A third class cell for a first class murderer was the headline in some newspapers. Another good sign (and shocking surprise), a few of my diehard BNP supporters are also happy about the outcome. Let’s finish the job - find all the murderers one by one. And let’s wait for that day when the face of the real behind-the-scene-plotter will be exposed. The so-called hero might turn into villain.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:04 am
A sin never spare its father (the sinner). It is again proved in case of Mohiuddin. The reaction of supporters of killers sounds like that of associates of Pakistani army after 16th December, 1971. Truth and justice shall prevail, that is the lesson of history.
June 20th, 2007 at 3:19 am
May we all remember our humanity.
June 21st, 2007 at 6:14 pm
Thanks “sarkar” you took the words right out of my mouth! I’ve been through quite few site’s where people reqard Mohiuddin as a hero. Shame on those people who have no knowledge of history, should be ashamed of themselves!