HC verdict on Hasina case, trial
in extortion case stayed
SC allows govt to appeal against HC verdict
Courtesy New Age 27/2/08
The Appellate Division on Tuesday allowed the government to appeal against the High Court verdict that had quashed the Tk 2.99 crore extortion case against detained former prime minister Sheikh Hasina under the Emergency Powers Rules amid heightened security at the Supreme Court.
A full bench of six Appellate Division judges, headed by the chief justice, M Ruhul Amin, stayed the operation of the High Court verdict and the trial of the extortion case filed by power company East Coast Trading Pvt Ltd managing director Azam Jahangir Chowdhury against Hasina, also the Awami League president, till the disposal of the appeal.
The court also posted for March 16 the hearing in the government appeal.
The court passed the orders after a two-day hearing in the government petition seeking permission to appeal against the High Court verdict delivered on February 6.
Security measures at the Supreme Court were tightened with the deployment of more security people on Monday when the Appellate Division started hearing the government petition.
A number of Awami League activists and supporters thronged outside the main entrance to the Supreme Court building on both Monday and Tuesday, but they were not let in.
Hasina’s counsel Rafique-ul Huq told reporters the trial proceedings in the extortion case would remain halted on the Appellate Division stay order.
Additional attorney general Salahuddin Ahmed, who moved the government petition, told New Age that the orders had cleared the way for the government to continue with the proceedings in other cases under the emergency rules as the Appellate Division stayed the operation of the High Court verdict that had declared illegal the trial of the offences committed before the declaration of the emergency under the emergency rules.
In the hearing, Rafique argued that the case was filed against Sheikh Hasina accusing her of being involved in extortion in 2001, about seven years before the declaration of the state of emergency.
The trial of an offence committed before the promulgation of the Emergency Powers Ordinance and the Emergency Powers Rules cannot be held under the emergency rules, he said.
The constitution and laws do not permit holding the trial of an offence under a law taking retrospective effect, he said.
The constitution allows trial in cases under the emergency rules of the offences that have taken place after the declaration of the state of emergency, the counsel argued.
Referring to different sections and rules of the Emergency Powers Ordinance and rules, he said all such sections and rules clearly stipulate that the provision made by them would be in effect as long as the state of emergency remains in force.
As the ordinance and rules do not make provisions for their retrospective effect, no provisions in such ordinance and rules can have retrospective effect and no offences committed before the framing of the rules can be tried under the emergency rules, he argued.
He also claimed that the case against Hasina was placed under the emergency rules considering her personal standing and social status, which is not allowed in any law.
Opposing the stay on the High Court verdict, Rafique argued, ‘The court may allow the government to appeal against the verdict, but should not halt its operation.’
Additional attorney general Salahuddin Ahmed, pleading for the stay order, told the court, ‘The High Court in its verdict has raised questions concerning 10 sections of the Emergency Powers Ordinance… If the verdict is upheld, the 10 sections would have to be annulled, jeopardising the trial of all the cases filed under the Emergency Powers Rules.’
Salahuddin also mentioned a High Court ruling by a different bench, headed by Justice ABM Khairul Haque, which cancelled a separate writ petition challenging the validity of the trial in another case under the emergency rules.
The High Court verdict in that case contradicts the same court’s verdict in the Hasina case, Salahuddin said. ‘The Appellate Division should resolve such legal contradictions.’
East Coast managing director Azam Jaghangir Chowdhury filed the case with the Gulshan police on June 13, 2007 alleging that the former prime minister, aided by her sister and cousin, had extorted Tk 2.99 crore from him for the award of the installation of a power plant in 2001. Hasina was arrested on July 16, 2007.
Hasina, her expatriate sister Sheikh Rehana and their cousin Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim, also a former minister, were charged by
The sessions court in the makeshift courtroom on the Jatiya Sangsad complex began the trial in the case on January 30 with the deposition by the complainant, Azam. The trial remains stalled because of the High Court verdict.
__._,_.___
[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___