The prosecution at the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) has asserted that the Awami League is innately associated with fascist behaviour, a characteristic it claims has been consistently manifested during the party’s periods in power.
During the presentation of arguments on Tuesday, Prosecutor Gazi MH Tamim made these remarks while addressing tribunal-2 in a case involving crimes against humanity during the July mass uprising.
The arguments focused on seven accused individuals, including former minister and Awami League General Secretary Obaidul Quader.
In his opening statements, Tamim outlined the jurisdiction of the ICT and the background of the July uprising, arguing that the events of July should not be viewed as isolated incidents of crime.
He contended that the crimes against humanity committed during the uprising were “systematic crimes” that were planned and executed on a widespread scale across the country. The prosecution further alleged that the Awami League engages in such criminal activities whenever it assumes office.
To provide historical context for these claims, the prosecution referenced the governance of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman between 1972 and 1975.
Tamim cited several scholarly works, including Bangladesh: Era of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman by Moudud Ahmed, to depict a period defined by corruption, misrule, and political instability. He argued that the democratic aspirations of the 1971 liberation war began to be undermined as early as 1972.
The prosecution specifically highlighted the formation of the Rakkhi Bahini, the establishment of BAKSHAL, and the killing of freedom fighters as evidence that human rights were curtailed following independence.
Tamim maintained that the link between the Awami League’s political conduct and fascist tendencies is a long-standing issue.
Turning to the July uprising, the prosecution alleged that former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina disparaged general students by labelling them as “Razakars” during the movement.
Following these comments, Obaidul Quader, then serving as the Road Transport and Bridges Minister, reportedly incited members of the Chhatra League to act against the protesters.
According to Tamim, these provocative statements led to violent attacks by Chhatra League and Jubo League members against students across Bangladesh, most notably at Dhaka University, resulting in significant loss of life.
The prosecution further alleged that Obaidul Quader played a pivotal role in the planning, direction, and execution of killings throughout July and August in his capacity as a powerful minister and party leader.
Other high-ranking figures, including Awami League Joint General Secretary AFM Bahauddin Nasim and former State Minister for Information Mohammad Ali Arafat, were also accused of direct involvement in suppressing the movement.
The prosecution’s case asserts that leaders and activists from the Awami League, Jubo League, and Chhatra League functioned as “auxiliary forces” alongside law enforcement agencies to participate in murder, torture, and the infliction of grievous bodily harm.
Tamim explained to the court that Obaidul Quader was charged based on the principle of “command responsibility,” a legal standard also applied to the other accused due to their senior positions within their respective organisations.
The list of other accused individuals includes AFM Bahauddin Nasim, Mohammad Ali Arafat, Jubo League President Sheikh Fazle Shams Parash, Jubo League General Secretary Mainul Hossain Khan Nikhil, Saddam Hussain, the president of the banned Chhatra League, and its general secretary, Sheikh Wali Asif Inan.
The court had previously concluded the recording of prosecution witnesses on 2 August, after which the date for arguments was fixed.
Formal charges against the seven accused were framed on 22 January. Earlier, on 18 December last year, the tribunal took the formal charges into cognisance and issued arrest warrants for the suspects.
As law enforcement agencies have been unable to apprehend them, the court appointed state-funded lawyers for the defence, and the trial is currently proceeding in absentia, which is permitted under existing law.
