Most amici curiae against court martial of BDR mutineers
Friday, 4 September 2009
Most of the legal experts made recommendations against the court martial of the BDR mutineers in the hearing on presidential reference on the BDR mutiny trial, reports bdnews24.com.
The Supreme Court (SC) concluded the hearing after six days of their deliberations Thursday.
Ten amici curiae or advisers to the court were appointed to give opinions on the president's reference.
Six of them gave their opinion against the possibility of trying the February 25-26 BDR mutineers under the Army Act, 1952, while two spoke in favour of military trial.
Two others expressed their opinion that the president's reference should be sent back altogether.
The apex court is expected to judge the reference soon.
Amici curiae AF Hassan Ariff and AFM Mesbahuddin observed that it was not possible to try the mutineers under the Army Act.
Mesbahuddin, the last of the advisers who concluded his statement at 11:30am Thursday, said the trial could be held under the existing law or speedy trial law.
The hearing by the 11-strong full Appellate Division bench, headed by chief justice MM Ruhul Amin, ended at 11:40am.
The court reconvened at around 10:15am with Hassan Ariff resuming his submission that he had begun Wednesday.
Attorney General Mahbubey Alam then delivered a concluding speech, while the court thanked the amici curiae for giving their opinions.
Ariff told reporters after the hearing: "It is not possible to directly try the BDR members under Army Act. The Army Act does not have the authority to effect trial of a previous action by issuing gazette."
"The court can send back the reference to the President by not giving any reply," he said.
Mesbahuddin said: "It is not possible to hold the trial under the Army Act. The pre facto effectiveness is not possible under this act."
"But it can be tried under existing law or speedy trial tribunal," he said.
Mahbubey Alam told reporters: "I have said that though it is not possible to hold direct trial under Army Act, the trial can be held by issuing gazette."
Asked when the Appellate Division would give its opinion, Alam said: "The court will send its opinion to the President. But it is the court's own affair when it will send it. There is no provision to give opinion openly."
Meanwhile, UNB adds: The Supreme Court wouldn't speak out about the result of the presidential reference on BDR rebels' trial mode after closing its hearings.
Sources in the SC told the news agency that the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (Appellate Division) Rules 1988 bar the judges from disclosing the result of such references.
After the hearing of a special reference, "the registrar shall transmit to the President the Report of the Court thereon", the sources said, quoting provisions of the rules.
The Supreme Court (SC) concluded the hearing after six days of their deliberations Thursday.
Ten amici curiae or advisers to the court were appointed to give opinions on the president's reference.
Six of them gave their opinion against the possibility of trying the February 25-26 BDR mutineers under the Army Act, 1952, while two spoke in favour of military trial.
Two others expressed their opinion that the president's reference should be sent back altogether.
The apex court is expected to judge the reference soon.
Amici curiae AF Hassan Ariff and AFM Mesbahuddin observed that it was not possible to try the mutineers under the Army Act.
Mesbahuddin, the last of the advisers who concluded his statement at 11:30am Thursday, said the trial could be held under the existing law or speedy trial law.
The hearing by the 11-strong full Appellate Division bench, headed by chief justice MM Ruhul Amin, ended at 11:40am.
The court reconvened at around 10:15am with Hassan Ariff resuming his submission that he had begun Wednesday.
Attorney General Mahbubey Alam then delivered a concluding speech, while the court thanked the amici curiae for giving their opinions.
Ariff told reporters after the hearing: "It is not possible to directly try the BDR members under Army Act. The Army Act does not have the authority to effect trial of a previous action by issuing gazette."
"The court can send back the reference to the President by not giving any reply," he said.
Mesbahuddin said: "It is not possible to hold the trial under the Army Act. The pre facto effectiveness is not possible under this act."
"But it can be tried under existing law or speedy trial tribunal," he said.
Mahbubey Alam told reporters: "I have said that though it is not possible to hold direct trial under Army Act, the trial can be held by issuing gazette."
Asked when the Appellate Division would give its opinion, Alam said: "The court will send its opinion to the President. But it is the court's own affair when it will send it. There is no provision to give opinion openly."
Meanwhile, UNB adds: The Supreme Court wouldn't speak out about the result of the presidential reference on BDR rebels' trial mode after closing its hearings.
Sources in the SC told the news agency that the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (Appellate Division) Rules 1988 bar the judges from disclosing the result of such references.
After the hearing of a special reference, "the registrar shall transmit to the President the Report of the Court thereon", the sources said, quoting provisions of the rules.