Four months after a fact-finding committee was formed to investigate allegations that a defendant in a high-profile crimes against humanity case was made a state witness in exchange for a bribe, the committee is yet to submit its report.
Meanwhile, International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) Prosecutor Gazi Monawar Hossain Tamim, who faces the allegations, continues to serve on the prosecution team without interruption.
Chief Prosecutor Md Aminul Islam claimed the inquiry is still underway and the report will be submitted soon. Contradicting him, several prosecutors said that the delay was intentional.
The allegations first surfaced publicly on 23 February, when Prosecutor BM Sultan Mahmud claimed in a Facebook post that the wife of former police sub-inspector Sheikh Abzalul Haque, an accused in a crimes against humanity case over the killing of seven people and the burning of five bodies in Ashulia, entered Tamim’s office one evening carrying a heavy bag.
He alleged that although the matter was reported to then chief prosecutor Tajul Islam, no action was taken.
According to Sultan Mahmud, Tamim later admitted in front of colleagues that Abzal’s wife had entered his office. Abzal was subsequently made a state witness and was pardoned by the tribunal in its final verdict. In the same post, Sultan accused Tajul of turning the office of chief prosecutor into “a machine for making money” by securing the release of accused persons in exchange for money through state witness arrangements.
Tamim has consistently denied the allegations. In a statement issued on 25 February, he described the claims as false and fabricated.
Rejecting the allegations, Tajul Islam in a statement on 24 February challenged that no one could produce even the slightest evidence against him. Speaking to TIMES of Bangladesh, he said a state witness merely assists the court and that it is the court—not the prosecution—that decides whether to grant immunity. He also said the allegation involving Abzal’s wife had been investigated and found to be untrue.
The government replaced Tajul Islam with Aminul Islam as chief prosecutor on 23 February. On 10 March, Aminul formed a five-member fact-finding committee, headed by himself, to investigate the allegations.
However, several prosecutors have questioned the pace and scope of the inquiry. They said key aspects of the allegations remain unverified. According to them, although Tajul was requested to preserve the relevant CCTV footage, it was not retained, nor was he questioned during the investigation.
One prosecutor said that although Tamim denied receiving a bag, he acknowledged that Abzal’s wife had entered his office. According to him, Tamim claimed no one else was present in the room. The door of his office room was locked from outside when the woman entered. However, and Tamim managed to come after someone else opened it.
Another prosecutor questioned whether the committee had obtained Abzal’s wife’s mobile phone number or questioned her at all. He also argued that Tamim’s mobile phone should have been seized for forensic examination, but that was never done.
The slow progress of the investigation and the unresolved allegations have reportedly caused growing dissatisfaction within the prosecution team. Multiple sources said some prosecutors are even considering to resign.
Prosecution sources claimed that special investigation officer and digital forensics expert Prosecutor Tanvir Hasan Zoha had analysed video footage, identified Abzal at the crime scene (Ashulia) and assessed his mobile phone’s electronic geolocation data. However, Zoha’s opinion was ignored when the decision was made to turn Abzal into a state witness.
They also alleged that the CCTV hard drive was never recovered or sent to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) for forensic examination.
Another source said that Abzal was present at the crime scene and personally opened fire. As a sub-inspector, he was in a commanding position and was seen in video footage wearing a red T-shirt and helmet while acting aggressively. According to the source, had he remained an accused instead of becoming a state witness, he could have faced severe punishment.
Chief Prosecutor Aminul Islam told TIMES that complainant Sultan Mahmud informed the committee he had not personally witnessed Abzal’s wife entering Tamim’s office but had seen it on CCTV footage. However, the footage can no longer be recovered because recordings stored on the hard drive are automatically deleted after a certain period.
“Until an allegation is proven, I have to continue working with everyone and carry out the prosecution’s responsibilities,” he said.
Immunity for security officials
Questions have also emerged over whether members of law enforcement accused of directing or participating in widespread killings during the July uprising are escaping prosecution. In some cases, senior officers have not been charged, while others have allegedly been turned into witnesses instead of defendants.
One example is the Chankharpul massacre in Dhaka, where the police officer accused of ordering officers to open fire was made a witness rather than an accused. In another case involving killings in Rampura, army officers were charged, but Dhaka Metropolitan Police Motijheel Division Deputy Commissioner Md Hayatul Islam Khan was not named as an accused despite allegations against him.
According to prosecution documents and sources, Sub-Inspector Md Ashraful Islam led a police team at Chankharpul on 5 August 2024, where officers fired at protesters while standing, kneeling and lying on the ground. As team leader, he instructed and encouraged subordinate officers to shoot. His presence and commands were captured on a private television channel’s camera.
Despite this, he was made a prosecution witness rather than an accused. He later testified as the 39th witness in the crimes against humanity case against ousted prime minister Sheikh Hasina. The tribunal delivered its verdict against Hasina and two co-accused on 17 November, sentencing them to death.
There are allegations that influential prosecutor Mizanul Islam intervened to have Ashraful treated as a witness. Mizanul denied the accusation.
In its Chankharpul verdict, the tribunal questioned why only three police officers were prosecuted when about 40 officers were present at the scene. Prosecutor Zoha confirmed that the court had raised this issue.
In the Rampura case, Hayatul Islam Khan, then deputy commissioner of DMP’s Motijheel Division, allegedly spoke by phone with then DMP Commissioner Habibur Rahman, arguing that protesters should be surrounded and fired upon from both directions. Habibur agreed.
Sources said Prosecutor Zoha seized a 50-second audio recording of the conversation from the National Telecommunication Monitoring Centre (NTMC), and analysis indicated possible involvement of both Hayatul and Habibur in crimes against humanity committed in Rampura.
While former DMP commissioner Habibur Rahman was prosecuted in the Chankharpul case and sentenced to death, Hayatul was not charged over the Rampura incident despite 28 protesters being killed. Two army officers—Mohammad Redwanul Islam and Md Rafat-bin-Alam—are now in prison as accused in the same case.
Prosecutor Mizanul Islam said becoming a witness does not provide immunity from future prosecution if evidence later emerges. He denied intervening to make SI Ashraful a witness and said he had never met him before his court testimony.
Regarding Hayatul, he said the investigation is ongoing and no one has been cleared of allegations.
Former Bangladesh Law Association convener and Supreme Court senior lawyer Monir Hossain argues both a superior officer who gives unlawful orders and the subordinate who carries them out are equally liable. “A person must first be an accused before a court can approve them as a state witness; they cannot be made a witness directly,” he told TIMES.
Legal experts, citing Sections 34, 35 and 36 of the Penal Code, said individuals acting with a common intention can bear equal criminal liability. They argue that granting de facto immunity by making a commanding officer at the crime scene a witness instead of a defendant could be legally, ethically and logically indefensible.
Sources in the prosecution said Hayatul began his police career as a probationary officer under former police officer Muhammad Shahidullah Chowdhury, who is the deputy coordinator of the ICT’s investigation agency. Following the fall of the Awami League government, he was transferred on 13 August 2024, and attached to the office of the Rajshahi Range Deputy Inspector General. He was DC Motijheel during July uprising.
