The petition of Mahfuzullah, a regular TV talk-show panelist, seeking to be relieved of personal appearance while facing contempt of court charge, the International Crimes Tribunal-1 on Tuesday threw away the plea saying his conduct is not good.
With Mahfuzullah standing on the aisle, the three-member tribunal, headed by Justice ATM Fazle Kabir, made the observation in rejecting his petition moved by Barrister Rumin Farhana, the counsel for the alleged contemner.
However, allowing his another petition, the tribunal adjourned for five weeks the hearing on the contempt case as the petitioner sought time for giving reply to the contempt charge.
When the counsel for Mahfuzullah raised the matter praying for adjournment of the hearing as Mahfuzullah could not come before the tribunal on the ground of blockade, the tribunal interrupted him marking the absence of Mahfuzullah.
The tribunal asked the counsel about his client as he has not been dispensed with personal appearance during hearing.
In reply, the counsel started faltering while trying to given an explanation. At this point, an apparently irked tribunal asked the counsel to make a phone call and ask Mahfuzullah to appear before it at 2 pm today (Tuesday), or else a warrant of arrest will be issued against him.
As the tribunal resumed after lunch break at 02:07 pm, Mahfuzullah appeared before the tribunal and his counsel moved two petitions — one for relieving him from personal appearance during hearing considering the current ‘volatile’ political situation and the other for adjournment to allow him time for a reply.
Designated prosecutor Sultan Mahmud Simon opposed the plea for relieving Mahfuzullah from personal appearance.
The prosecutor told the tribunal that the hearing on the contempt of court charge should take place in presence of Mahfuzullah who had ‘discredited’ the prosecution and the judges of the ICT both at home and abroad through participating in the impugned TV Talk-show, terming it very unfortunate.
Hearing both the sides, the tribunal rejected the plea of relieving Mahfuzullah from personal appearance during hearing on the contempt case with an observation.
“His conduct is not good. We’ll further observe his conduct and the question of entertaining his plea depends on the follow up observation,” said the tribunal.
About the adjournment, the tribunal allowed the plea and set January 28, 2014 for hearing on the contempt case.
Another alleged contemner, public health activist Dr Zafrullah Chowdhury of Ganoshasthaya appeared at the tribunal for contesting the case in person without engaging any lawyer.
Earlier, despite the tribunal’s order, Mahfuzullah did not turn up twice on different pretexts. On November 28, he moved a plea through his counsel for adjournment as he could not come to the tribunal due to rail-road-waterways blockade enforced by the BNP-led 18-party alliance.
Expressing doubt, the tribunal had termed very unfortunate the stance of Mahfuzullah and observed that the tribunal did not see anyone facing problem to go the TV centres to take part in talk-shows during the blockade.
Responding to a prosecution plea, the tribunal on September 26 asked the management of Channel 24 to show cause why contempt proceedings should not be initiated for airing the ‘scandalous’ talk-show titled ‘Muktobaak’ at 11 pm on September 18 over the 1971 war crimes accused Salauddin Quader Chowdhury MP of BNP.
The tribunal order said: “On perusal of the application for contempt and witnessing the ‘Muktobaak’ talk-show through DVD, we find that Dr Zafrullah Chowdhury and Mahfuzullah without knowing the facts have deliberately criticized the court proceedings.”
“Upon scrutiny of the criticisms made by the two participants on subjudice matter, we’re of the opinion that they have made false and fabricated statements on subjudice matter,” it said.
The tribunal further said there are reasonable grounds to draw up contempt proceedings against Dr Zafrullah Chowdhury and Mahfuzullah as they, without knowing the factual aspects of the case, most unethically tried to give a message to the people that accused Salauddin Quader has been deprived of proving his defence case.
Source: UNB Connect
This political saga, the intention and motive is clear when the Executive-controlled subservient “JUDGE” said to the accused, ” IF YOU CAN ATTEND THE TV TALK SHOW BY IGNORING THE BLOCADE WHY COUYLD NOT YOU DO THE SAME TO ATTEND THIS TRIBUNAL.”?
But the “Judge” deliberately ignored to the mention that the situation in the city was completely different and the intensity of attack was not same on both days