Irwin Cotler's Editorial

JUSTICE: HUMANITARIAN RELIEF

Shouldn't Canada intervene? Ottawa must step in to save a former Bangladeshi diplomat facing U.S. extradition

IRWIN COTLER

MP for Mount Royal and Opposition critic for human rights Mohuiddin (Din) Ahmed is not a household name, but his case is becoming a cause célèbre on both sides of the Canadian-U.S. border. The former Bangladesh diplomat is in imminent danger of being deported from the United States to Bangladesh, where he is likely to be executed for a prior wrongful conviction in absentia, a politically motivated hearing utterly devoid of the fundamental right to a fair trial.

An urgent Canadian intervention could stay the deportation and save his life. His immediate family, including Canadian relatives, have appealed to Ottawa for just such humanitarian relief.

Mr. Ahmed's situation has its roots in a 1975 coup that claimed the lives of Bangladeshi prime minister Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his family. A military officer at the time, Mr. Ahmed was stationed at a roadblock 1½ kilometres from the prime minister's residence the night of the coup, ignorant of the events transpiring inside, a fact corroborated by witnesses.
After leaving the military, Mr. Ahmed became a senior member of the diplomatic corps. In 1996, Mr. Rahman's daughter,

Sheik Hasina Wajed, became prime minister and ordered criminal prosecutions against anyone she suspected of involvement in the 1975 coup, including Mr. Ahmed. When he was ordered to return from his diplomatic posting abroad, Mr.
Ahmed knew his life was in danger. He fled with his wife and daughter to the United States, where his son was a university student.

Meanwhile, in Bangladesh, a politically motivated show trial began with Mr. Ahmed's court-appointed Bangladeshi counsel – allied with the Prime Minister – denying his client the fundamental rights to a fair trial. In particular, his lawyer:

• Never raised any defences, including factual innocence;
• Failed to conduct an investigation and identify exculpatory witnesses or evidence;
• Failed to contact Mr. Ahmed or his family to inquire about the charges, or to inquire about his whereabouts on the night of the coup;
• Waived cross-examination of most of the witnesses who testified against Mr. Ahmed;
• Failed to object to hearsay evidence and other prejudicial and unreliable testimony.

In short, the trial was a complete miscarriage of justice, culminating in a wrongful conviction. However, the question might well be asked: Why should Canada intervene? Should we not respect the decisions of the U.S. courts and immigration
process? Is this not a matter of U.S.-Bangladesh bilateral concern, rather than one of Canadian humanitarian relief?
In fact, there is a clear connection to this case that warrants Canadian intervention.

First, this is a humanitarian protection issue of the first order – a man's life is at stake. Canadian policy prohibits capital punishment or the transfer to a jurisdiction where it may take place. Canada should not be a bystander when
its intervention can make a difference.

Second, Mr. Ahmed has immediate family in Canada, including nieces in both Nova Scotia and Toronto. I met yesterday with his niece Jinat Jahan and his daughter Sabrina, who were in Ottawa to appeal for government officials
to intervene by allowing Mr. Ahmed's formal application for refugee status to proceed, or by providing immediate relief on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. The United States could be asked to stay its deportation order.

Third, Mr. Ahmed's plight arises from an initial wrongful conviction. That miscarriage of justice should not now be allowed to morph into a wrongful execution. The U.S. State Department observed in a 2006 report that Bangladesh's courts were “plagued by corruption … conditions [that] effectively prevented many persons from obtaining a fair trial due to witness
tampering, victim intimidation, and missing evidence.” Inexplicably, the State Department assessment that the U.S. Immigration Court used to deny asylum to Mr. Ahmed did not adhere to its own evaluation of the Bangladesh justice system, while ignoring the specific miscarriages of justice that culminated in this wrongful conviction.

Fourth, Canada has a partnership agreement with Bangladesh to assist in matters relating to the protection of the rule of law, the protection of the independence of the judiciary and due process in the criminal justice system. While justice minister, I met twice with my Bangladeshi counterpart to advance and oversee our engagement in the protection of the rule of law.

This understanding provides yet another rationale.There is no appeal from capital punishment. No wrongful conviction ending in death can ever be redeemed. Canada should act now to provide the necessary humanitarian relief, allow the ends of justice to be served and save this man's life.

Irwin Cotler is a former justice minister and attorney-general. He acts as counsel to the Ahmed family.

NEUTRALITY OF THE NEUTRAL ADMINITRATION

Following the political remarks of the Chief of Army Staff, Lt Gen Moeen U Ahmed at a non-political gathering on March 26 and elsewhere later, a few concerns and questions come to public mind. Clearly, the General raised issues harbored by a particular political party, and not necessarily the voice of the nation.

Various actions taken by the CTG so far, with the help of the military, have been widely acclaimed. People are happy to see those who defrauded the nation and plundered national resources behind bars. These culprits should face the heavy hand of justice at the earliest. EC is working on making various steps with a view to holding fair and credible elections the soonest. The neutrality and credibility of the CTG should not be dented by dealing with any partisan issues.

Father of the Nation

The CAS has virtually hinted that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman be officially named the father of the nation. One fails to understand why the CAS decided to tread on this highly controversial and politicized issue, though being part of a temporary and neutral system.

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was one of our top leaders and had huge contribution towards the independence of Bangladesh. However, I am not sure whether entire benefit for the liberation or emancipation of Bengalis should go to Sheikh Mujib alone, ignoring the contributions of such great leaders as Sher-e-Bangla Fazlul Huq, Maulana Bhasani, Shaheed Suhrawardy, Ziaur Rahman, Tajuddin Ahmed and others.

If we interpret the history correctly, the seed of Bangladesh’s independence was sown in the Lahore Resolution of 1940. Since the Pakistani leaders failed to implement the original version of the resolution, as proposed by Sher-e-Bangla, our struggle started since. Immediately after the partition in1947, came the language movement. The fight for our rights and independent identity continued in various forms from various platforms.

If I am not wrong, it was Maulana Bhasani who first declared, after the 1970 tidal wave that devastated our coastal belt and took few hundred thousand lives, “To the West Pakistanis, As-Salaamualaikum. From now on, my only demand is Independent East Pakistan”.

Undoubtedly, Sheikh Mujib’s contributions for the emancipation of Bangladeshis in the late 60s until March 1971 are overwhelming. Few leaders could muster the type of speech to match the March 7, 1971 speech. However, we cannot ignore Ziaur Rahman who made the independence announcement at the Chittagong Radio Station on March 26/27, 1971 at his own initiative, as well as Tajuddin Ahmed who gave leadership during our crucial liberation war.

Again, why some partisan elements are clamoring for the title of father of the nation? How many countries, out of nearly 200 the world over, have father of the nation? Why is it so important or needed for Bangladesh? If Mujib is not made the father of the nation, will his contribution be diminished?

Mujib’s Legacy After 1971

I do not want to sound unkind to Sheikh Mujib, but, before we deal with the issue, we may look into the following aspects concerning his role and activities since March 1971:

Details of negotiations between the teams of Mujib and Yahya from March 15-24, 1971, to ascertain if Mujib wanted independence or autonomy for Bangladesh, even after his March 7 speech.

Circumstances leading to Mujib’s arrest/surrender on the night of August 25, 1971.

“Witness to Surrender”, by Siddiq Salek

Mujib’s administration between 1972-1975.

Mujib’s creation of Rakkhi Bahini, it’s role and actions.

The deaths and sufferings under the man-made famine of 1974/75.

The declaration of emergency in 1974 and consequent policy changes.

The 4th constitutional amendment in January 1975.

The formation of BAKSAL and its objectives

Under the new political arrangement in 1975, all political parties, political activities, assembly etc were banned except those of the Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League (BAKSAL). All publications, except the 3 government owned and Ittefaq, were banned. All fundamental rights were suspended.

I would humbly urge the older generation to walk back the memory line and reflect on these events. At the same time, I would request the younger generation, who did not have the fortune or misfortune to understand or experience that “Golden Period” (1972-1975) of Bangladesh, please read the following, among others:

“Indemnity Addyadesh Rohit—Kar Sarthey?” (Repeal of Indemnity—in Whose Interest?) an article by M M Azizul Huq published in the Daily Inqilab on November 1, 1991.

Towards the Emergency” by Badruddin Umar

“War and Secession: Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh” by Richard Sisson and Leo E Rose.

The N Y Times of December 13, 1974.

“Ponorai August Neechak Hatyakandda Chhilona” (15 August Was Not a Mere Killing), by A O Chowdhury, published in the Weekly Thikana of New York on November 22, 1996.

“Desh-Bideshey Jatir Pita” (Father of the Nation Around the World) by Mahmudur Rahman, published in the daily Naya Diganta on April 4, 2007 in Dhaka.

Partisan Issue

The father of the nation has been a partisan matter of Awami League. No other party or the public showed any interest in the issue. Sheikh Mujib named himself president and father of the nation through the 4th constitutional amendment in January 1975, which was nullified after August 15, 1975 and ratified through the 5th amendment in 1979. Sheikh Mujib became father of the nation again for a brief period during the administration of his daughter Sheikh Hasina from 1996-2001. It implies, for 31 out of 36 years of Bangladesh, no one raised the issue of father of the nation, nor one wanted it. Why should the CTG raise this partisan issue to make itself controversial or partisan?

I hope the public does not get a mistaken notion that the army chief is towing a particular party line, though being part of a neutral system.

RKhan
Dhaka, Bangladesh

Rouben’s reply to Sajeeb Wazed, the grandson of slain Prime Minister Mujibur Rahman

From One Son to Another

Dear Sajeeb,

I read your interview in the LA Times and, I must first say, my heart goes out to you and all the members of your family who lost loved ones on the night of the military coup on August 15th, 1975. Many innocent people were killed that dark night, including women and children, and these killings were not justified in any way. But now another innocent life is about to be lost and his death will not be justified either. That man is my father, Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed.

You and I were both very young children on that tragic night, a night that destroyed much of your family and a night that is currently destroying mine. Therefore, neither of us really knows what happened when your grandfather’s house was stormed by over 100 soldiers 36 years
ago.

And since the killings that occurred that night were never investigated until twenty-one years after the military coup, we may never know the full truth.

You grew up hearing only one story about that military coup. You, and much of current Bangladesh, was told that a few disgruntled junior officers snuck into your grandfather’s house and systematically killed every one they could.

Well, I think even you would have to agree this scenario is impossible. You, yourself, know your grandfather had a private army that shot back at the 100+ soldiers who entered that home. I think it’s pretty clear to everyone that there were so many bullets flying that dark night; shot by soldiers wearing the standard Bengali black uniform, that it is impossible to tell who was shooting whom.

But what is clear to me is that my father was not one of those soldiers shooting. At the time of the coup my father was following orders and manning a roadblock in the city over a mile away from your grandfather’s house.

Sajeeb….do you not find it odd that after the coup my father was able to have a 20-year diplomatic career, honorably serving Bangladesh, in five foreign countries? My father faithfully represented Bangladesh as a diplomat under eight successive Bangladeshi administrations, including governments influenced by your own Awami League political party. How is it possible for my father to be able to do that if he was the assassin of your family? For 20 years, eight Bangladeshi governments were all able to do a complete background check on my father and say to his hosting countries: Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed is an honorable man. They were able to do so because my father is not the demon you portray him to be.

I know that eyewitnesses in the in absentia trial for my father in 1996 testified that they saw him in the president’s home 21 years earlier. But you know, as well as I do, that 21 years after fact eyewitness testimony is totally unreliable. And, sadly, we both know, eyewitness testimony can be easily bought in our home country. Eyewitnesses can even be intimidated into testifying the false truth. One should not be swayed by self-serving and tutored witnesses. It is my understanding, that many of the ‘witnesses’ were not even present in the palace on the night of the coup. People who were not even in the army at the time of the coup testified they saw my father shooting in the palace. How is that even possible? I would also like to add that there was never any physical evidence placing my father in that house on that night.

You also know, as well as I do, when your mother’s political party appointed the judges in my father’s case, and selected his defense attorney, my father never had a chance. The verdict of death was a 100% certainty before the first day in court in 1996. And now, in 2007, I’m sure the same would be true. After eleven years of propaganda against my father, I’m sure he still wouldn’t get a fair trial in such a highly charged politically orchestrated case.

I’m sorry for your loss. I truly am, but killing an innocent man like my father, will not bring your family back nor serve justice.

Please, let’s not compound one tragedy with another.

Rouben Mohiuddin April 2007

Here is the truth: From the son of Major Mohiuddin

Here Is The Truth - From The Son Of Maj. Mohiuddin Ahmed
A lot is being said about what happened in 1975 and the current situation now, but I can tell you from first hand experience the truth.

I am the son of Maj. Mohiuddin Ahmed My father’s name is Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed. My father is a victim of political revenge.
Here is his story - By way of background, he joined the Pakistan military in 1966, and was commissioned as a second lieutenant in 1967. After the war of liberation with Pakistan, my father was held in confinement in a Pakistani concentration camp from 1972 to 1974. I did not see my father till the age of 3. He was then repatriated to Bangladesh in 1974. He then honourably served in the Bangladesh military from 1974 to 1975. Thereafter, he served in the diplomatic service until 1996. In 1975 he was a young major serving faithfully in the Bangladesh Army. In 1975 the president of Bangladesh was Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Mujibur ruled by his absolute authority for four and a half years and nobody dared or was allowed to challenge him.

Some of you probably remember - In 1974, Sheikh Mujibur declared a national emergency and stopped all democratic activities and ruthlessly suppressed any one who opposed him and his family. There was no freedom of speech, no open politics, most newspapers and publications banned and all fundamental rights were suspended. The events leading up to the coup in 1975 are well known to all of the Bangladeshi people, and the events cannot be denied. In 1974, Sheikh Mujibur declared a national emergency and suppressed all democratic activities, and opponents. Freedom of speech was taken away from Bangladeshi citizens, and all fundamental rights were suspended. In January 1975, one-party rule under BAKSAL was introduced, and Sheikh Mujibur became Prime Minister/President.
By the summer of ‘75 mass starvation and political murders pushed the military to take action. Bangladesh was on the verge of collapsing with the government stealing all foreign aid.

On August 15th, 1975 my father was on military night maneuvers, a common training practice during his years in the army. But that night his superiors ordered maneuvers in support of what they claimed was a peaceful coup. It was their intention to force the president to step down and turn over power to a caretaker government. My father obeyed what he considered to be lawful orders from superior officers to set up a roadblock on a main city street more than one mile from one of the presidential homes.

The next morning my father, along with the rest of Bangladesh, learned that during the coup, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and some family members had, regretfully, been killed when the president’s bodyguards fought back the soldiers trying to place Sheikh Mujibur Rahman under military arrest. My father was not in the palace that night. He was a mile away.
After the coup, the country did in fact shift to a democratic government and democracy has been part of Bangladesh since, except for brief subsequent coups and political assassinations. Even the US Government, which had never acknowledged Bangladesh before, immediately established a diplomatic relationship with the post-coup new government in 1975.
Some time after the coup, those involved were absolved by the Government of Bangladesh for any wrongdoing, and many members of the military were promoted in rank or joined the diplomatic service.

In fact, the Bangladeshi government assigned my father to be posted overseas as part of the diplomatic corp. and he traveled extensively, stationing in various countries such as Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Thailand and others. Throughout all this time, 20 years, He honored his country as a diplomat with exemplary conduct and extreme dignity. He was Deputy Ambassador of Bangladesh in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War, and was the head of the Bangladeshi mission in Iraq from 1993 to 1996. His Iraq assignment was the equivalent of Ambassador.

But then the political winds shifted. In 1996, in Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina, the surviving daughter of the president who was killed in 1975, came to power and promised "justice" [revenge] against anybody who was involved in the coup of ’75, regardless of their actual involvement, and regardless of the constitution that prohibited punishment against members in the military present during that ’75 coup. A double standard is apparent here as some high-ranking officials, involved in the ‘75 coup, are now part of Sheikh Hasina’s political party and therefore are still living in freedom in Bangladesh.

My father, along with several other men accused of the murder, was tried in absentia in 1996. Yes, it is true, that my father could have gone back to Bangladesh to try and defend himself but he knew he would not be safe and would not get a fair trial. I know it’s hard for Americans to understand but, sadly, my country is very corrupt and so poor that eyewitness testimony can be bought for as little as one hundred dollars. And when the trial is politically stacked against you even the defense lawyers are either biased against those whom they are charged with defending, or in danger for their advocacy. It was widely reported then that even a few members of the defense team who were strenuously defending the accused were publicly threatened by the Awami league, and agitated members of the public stripped and beat those lawyers in the courthouse.

Besides the false testimony supplied by paid witnesses, other witnesses could not recall, 20 years later, who was or who was not in the palace that dark night. In fact some witnesses claimed my father was in the palace but then realized that they were actually referring to a different man, with the same name as my father, but with a different rank. Various witnesses even recalled my father as being in more than one place at once.

My father was lawfully present in the United States when he applied for political asylum under the United Nations Torture Convention because his life and his family were in danger, given the unstable political situation back home. Meanwhile Sheikh Hasina dismissed all the judges assigned to the case of the ’75 coup and appointed her own judges de facto creating a kangaroo court which sentenced him to be hanged.

He then followed the bureaucratic path of political asylum under the immigration laws of the US, and under the United Nations Convention. Everything seemed to be proceeding well until 9/11. After that date, with the rapid passage of the Patriot Act and the creation of Homeland Security, my father was excluded from the protection granted by the immigration laws and the torture convention. During the ten year fight to stay in America my father never broke any laws in this country. He is a gentle and peaceful soul who has worked within the US courts system to fight deportation to a country known for torture and corruption.

Clearly my father is a scapegoat in a much larger political game in both the US and in Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina fanned the flames by calling him a "terrorist", knowing how much the American government dreads this term, she used this to get my father extradited and finally hanging him.

Sadly, my country of Bangladesh is currently in crisis once again. As recently as January 27 people have been killed in political riots and assassinations. It is a highly charged situation and my father has no hope in surviving upon his return. Even according to the most recent US State Department Report on Human Rights, Bangladesh is plagued by torture and political murders. Sheikh Hasina and her political party want revenge, without regard for the truth.
My father has no one to help him. He honorably served the military for nine years and as a diplomat for another 20 years, throughout eight successive administrations of Bangladesh governments. My father is not a terrorist and is guilty of nothing except trusting in a system blinded by politics.

If the US insists on deporting my father he will continue the fight in Bangladesh. He will face his accusers and reopen the case. Major political and military officials will be forced to take the stand and the truth will finally come out. I hope everyone, who is interested in the truth, will spread the word in Bangladesh that my father is ready for the fight. This is far from over. In fact it’s just began