DR. ALI AL-GHAMDI NEW York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) has asked the Bangladeshi authorities to immediately explain the fate of Shukho Ranjan Bali who disappeared just before presenting his testimony before the war crimes court in Dhaka which was established after the separation of East Pakistan from West Pakistan and the establishment of Bangladesh. The court was to try those accused of crimes against humanity during he civil war which lasted for nine months. The court was meant to try a number of Pakistani military officers who were pardoned under a tripartite agreement between Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. The government of Bangladesh revived this court after 41 years under the name of the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) to try some of its political opponents. Mr. Bali was originally a prosecution witness but it seems that his conscience was awakened and he decided that he wanted to be a defense witness for Sheikh Delwar Hossain Sayedee, the famous preacher, eloquent orator and prominent parliamentarian. The government of the day in Bangladesh arrested Sayedee in parliament and put him in jail on charges of crimes against humanity which he allegedly committed more than 40 years ago. Bali and lawyers defending Sayedee were stopped at the gate of the court by guards who asked them to show their IDs. When they recognized Bali, the police detectives asked him to climb into a van. When he tried to object, the police officers slapped him several times on the face and head and pushed him into the van, according to a statement by HRW quoting defense lawyers and other witnesses. The defense lawyers informed the judge about the incident. Instead of asking the police to investigate the claim, the judge asked the prosecution to do so. A few hours later the prosecution told the judge that the entire episode was a charade fabricated by the defense. The fate of Bali is still not known. His wife told an independent journalist that her husband left for Dhaka during the first days of last November to present his testimony in favor of Sayedee at the ICT on the fifth of the month and has since then disappeared. She said her daughter, who lives with her in-laws, came to stay with her after she learned about the disappearance of her father, but that her son was terrified and left the village. Brad Adams, Asia director at HRW, said the allegation of an abduction is of the utmost seriousness since the person abducted is at great risk of being killed. "The government should have immediately mobilized all available resources to find Bali but has done nothing, making it appear at best indifferent to the welfare of one of its citizens." Justice Nizamul Huq, the then chairman of the trial chamber sitting on the case, told HRW that he had asked the prosecution at the ICT to verify all the allegations of irregularities, including the disappearance of Bali, although the prosecution was an interested party in the trials. He acknowledged that this was not the normal practice in Bangladesh. He provided no legal or practical reasons for this decision. Although he vociferously denied any bias against the defense, Justice Haq had a member of the prosecution team and the deputy registrar with him in his chambers during the entire interview with HRW as he had in previous meetings. This means that the judge was not at liberty to speak freely about the case. The Economist, which published the scandal, said that Justice Haq was in contact through Skype with a Bangladeshi lawyer living in Belgium who is close to the government. It said the judge exchanged email messages with the lawyer and received instructions from him. Justice Haq resigned after the scandal broke out. Human Rights Watch said the disappearance of Bali happened after the prosecution announced that they were unable to produce certain prosecution witnesses including Bali. As a result, the prosecution applied for and was granted a motion allowing them to put into evidence written testimony without either direct or cross-examination. A defense challenge to this motion, which included evidence from government safe-house logbooks showing that witnesses were available to testify, was rejected by the court without a serious investigation. Human Rights Watch asked the government and its security organs to make an urgent, serious and politically independent search for Bali. It said asking the prosecution to do so was not a correct or acceptable action. The organization is not convinced by the government's explanation concerning the disappearance of a key defense witness. Other human rights organizations such as the UN Council on Human Rights, Amnesty International and the World Council of Lawyers and other personalities including some members of the British House of Lords have stated that the actions of the Bangladeshi government on the case were illegal. They also said the ICT is not an international court working under international law nor is it a local body using local laws. Bangladesh Justice Minister Shafique Ahmed did not heed the criticism nor the calls to search for the missing witness. On the contrary he said the trials were fair, honest and transparent. Foreign Minister Dipu Moni criticized the delegation of Turkish lawyers who visited Dhaka. She was not happy about the statements made by the Turkish lawyers to the effect that the trials were obscure and were against the political rivals of the government with whom she was allied while she was in the opposition during the rule of Gen. Hussain Mohammed Ershad. The trials have no support either in international or local law. — Dr. Ali Al-Ghamdi is a former Saudi diplomat who specializes in Southeast Asian affairs. He can be reached at Twitter
