State-appointed lawyers seek acquittal for Awami League leaders and associates in International Crimes Tribunal case
Photo Collected
State-appointed defense lawyers have formally requested the acquittal of seven high-profile figures associated with the banned Awami League, who are facing charges of crimes against humanity linked to the July mass uprising. The petitions were filed on Thursday at International Crimes Tribunal-2 during the second day of closing arguments.
Lawyer M. Hasan Imam, representing former Awami League General Secretary Obaidul Quader, Joint General Secretary AFM Bahauddin Nasim, and former State Minister for Information and Broadcasting Mohammad Ali Arafat, argued that the charges of superior command responsibility were unfounded. Imam contended that while his clients implemented directives issued by another party, they did not personally orchestrate the violence or killings. He further asserted that his clients were physically absent from the sites of the incidents and thus should not be held criminally liable for the casualties or injuries reported during the unrest.
Separately, state-appointed lawyer Israt Jahan presented arguments for the remaining four defendants: Jubo League Chairman Sheikh Fazle Shams Parash, Jubo League General Secretary Mainul Hossain Khan Nikhil, Chhatra League President Saddam Hossain, and Chhatra League General Secretary Sheikh Wali Asif Inan.
Addressing the court regarding Mainul Hossain Khan Nikhil, Jahan stated that prosecution evidence, including video footage and reports, failed to substantiate allegations that he carried weapons during the protests. She noted that no witnesses had testified to seeing him armed. Regarding the charges of incitement and instigation brought against all four of her clients, Jahan argued that the prosecution failed to provide evidence that any of the defendants explicitly ordered attacks or violence against students and protesters.
Specifically addressing the allegations against Chhatra League President Saddam Hossain—who was accused of threatening to “take care” of the movement—Jahan maintained that the statement was intended to mean bringing the movement under control through political means, rather than a directive to kill or inflict harm. All seven defendants remain in hiding, necessitating the appointment of state counsel by the tribunal to represent their interests in the ongoing proceedings.
0%
0%
0%
0%
