Skip to main content

A War Crimes Tribunal for Bangladesh



The process of building a society from scratch in the aftermath of any conflict must necessarily involve a judicial intervention. Justice is the surest way to sustainable peace. One may argue that nothing can truly restore losses - but justice offers a way to ensure that those who committed crimes cannot come back to harm the society because they have already been sentenced.

One of the places that most needs a judicial process to try past war crimes is Bangladesh. The birth of the nation involved a harsh struggle that claimed too many lives - as a crime of genocide was allegedly the handiwork of 195 Pakistani military officials who haven’t been tried thus far. Some of the people that even collaborated with the conduct of the war crimes became active politicians and served in governmental posts. In the light of the crimes that unfolded in Bangladesh, a war crimes tribunal is a necessary element in ensuring the delivery of justice that has been long overdue.

The promise of a war crimes tribunal was one of the many things put forth by the ruling party – and this was a linchpin in their attainment of success in the elections. However, the tribunal that did ensue after did not succeed – there were too many outside interventions and the tribunal has been subject to much politicisation, thereby becoming a political weapon for the party in power. This then led to violence.

As is the case with many countries across the world, Bangladesh’s judiciary has no immunities to procedural flaws. It has been politicised, and some in the leadership has had a track record of criminal involvement. Coupled with all of this is the fact that there is no evidence left of the incidents, many of those who could be witnesses in the case are not around anymore, and the trial is likely to hinge on circumstantial evidence, hear say and hand-me-down stories. Consequently, it might make it easier to beat the rules aside and find a way to bend procedure. This would, in turn, give room for more corruption to unfold.

The war crimes tribunal should truly serve the purpose. It needs to cease being a political instrument and evolve as a mechanism that would truly do justice.



Comments

Popular

Use Of Human Shield In Kashmir – A Legal Analysis

A lot has been debated and written about the ‘human shield’ incident that happened on April 9, 2017, in Kashmir’s Budgam district. Farooq Ahmed Dar, a 26-year-old shawl weaver of Chil village in Beerwah sub-district was tied in front of an Army Jeep and allegedly paraded through several villages for nearly five hours.[1] The media, lawyers, politicians and even army officers have stark differences of opinion on the legality of the said incident.[2] Major Leetul Gogoi, who tied the victim on the army jeep was awarded chief of army staff’s Commendation Card for sustained efforts in counter-insurgency operations.[3] This award was given pending proceedings before the court of inquiry into the said incident. On the other hand, the victim, Farooq Ahmed Dar approached the State Human Rights Commission against the reward given to Major Gogoi by the Army and separate petitions were filed before the National Human Rights Commission against the felicitation.[4] It is alleged that the actions of…

Qatar invokes ICJ Jurisdiction against UAE- Alleges Racial Discrimination

The State of Qatar on the 11th of July, instituted proceedings against the United Arab Emirates at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), with regard to alleged violations of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,1965 (hereinafter the “CERD”), to which both States are parties. Qatar invoked the ICJ's jurisdiction under Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Court and Article 22 of the CERD. Qatar contended that the UAE has enacted and implemented a series of discriminatory measures directed at Qataris based expressly on their national origin [that] remain in effect to this day, resulting in alleged human rights violations. According to Qatar, on and following 5 June 2017, the UAE expelled all Qataris within its borders; prohibited them from entering or passing through the UAE; closed UAE airspace and seaports to Qatar and Qataris; interfered with the rights of Qataris who own property in the UAE; limited the rights of Qatar…

The Battle of the Oil Titans: Qatar drags UAE to the ICJ alleging violations of the CERD

In what can be said as a fresh face-off in already hostile relations between The State of Qatar and Gulf countries, the former acting under parens patraie doctrine has initiated proceedings at the International Court of Justice against United Arab Emirates (UAE) on 11th June invoking Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Court and Article 22 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 1965 (hereinafter CERD). The proceedings come a year after Qatar was accused of funding terrorism in the region keeping in view its proximity with Iran and consequently, Egypt, Bahrain, UAE and Saudi Arabia severed its diplomatic and trade ties with it. Qatar (Applicant) in its application to the Court contends that “[t]he UAE has enacted and implemented a series of discriminatory measures directed at Qataris based expressly on their national origin [that] remain in effect to this day, resulting in alleged human rights violations.”
According to Qatar…