Saturday, 28th November, 2020
Choose Language:

Barrister Abdur Razzak in the reaction of verdict: This case is totally on false. Each witness is disputed and unbelievable.
Sunday, 12 May 2013
Friday, 10th May, 2013.
Jamaat Assistant Secretary General kamaruzzaman’s lawyer Barrister Abdur Razzak gives a speech at a press conference in his own house yesterday Thursday. Sangram

Staff Reporter: The main of defense team and senior lawyer Barrister Abdur Razzak said mentioning questionable the verdict of Jamaat-e-Islami Assistant Secretary General Muhammad kamaruzzaman, there is no any opportunity to give punishment according to evidence. This case is totally on false. We are stunned and alarmed in this this verdict. Each of the Prosecution witnesses is disputed and untrusted. It\'s hard to accept that the court can give punishment someone in the basis of weak, contradictory and unbelievable evidence.  We will appeal against this verdict. Because there is strong ground to appeal. The International Criminal Tribunal-2 gives sentence kamaruzzaman to death on last Thursday afternoon. Barrister Abdur Razzak said these to journalist in the reaction of verdict at his residence. At this time defense team of lawyers, Advocate Tajul Islam and Advocate Farid Uddin Khan were also present. Barrister Abdur Razzak said in his written statement Assistant Secretary General of Jamaat-e-Islami kamaruzzaman has been given sentence to death. But we think that there is no opportunity to give bany punishment on the basis of false evidence let alone death sentence. According to recognition kamaruzzaman was a young in 1971. Trials as crimes against humanity occurred From Nuremberg till today were not faced any young to trial. This is an unprecedented event in the history of war crimes trials. The reason is to impose on Kamaruzzaman the liability of the verdict; he is an Assistant Secretary General of one the party. He said that we are stunned in this verdict. Prosecution has been failed to prove the case. Mohan Munshi is the talk of the table for giving contradictory statements in his evidence. He has mentioned different dates in his deposition about the killing of Golam Mostafa in Sohagapur. At one point witnesses said kamaruzzaman was a young. On the other hand they said he directed controlled the officers of Pakistan army. The witness claimed themselves as a freedom fighter. But it is proved that they are bogus. Barrister Abdur Razzak said that this verdict is questionable with method. Though tribunal admitted 18 people to give evidence on behalf prosecution, defense party’s witness was only 5. . Investigation association and prosecution arranged this case within one and half year. But the duration of defense party was only four weeks. The importance thing is that Nizamul Haque Nasim gave the order to take evidence against Kamaruzzaman. But he is questionable because of Skype scandal. We will appeal against this verdict.