'Discrepancies give way for militants'

Holey Artisan Bakery after the attack on 1 July, 2016. File Photo: Prothom Alo
Holey Artisan Bakery after the attack on 1 July, 2016. File Photo: Prothom Alo

Former engineer of Bangladesh Shipping Corporation Tamim Dari, says the RAB, is a 'dangerous' terrorist and was a close associate of the Holey Artisan Bakery attack mastermind Tamim Chowdhury.

He tried to reorganise the Sarwar-Tamim faction of the terrorist outfit Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen, Bangladesh (JMB) after the death of its two top leaders, according to the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB).

The RAB personnel arrested him from a house in Jatrabari area of the capital on 1 February 2017 in connection with an anti-terrorism suit and recovered huge amount of firearms, ammunitions and books and leaflets on Jihadism from his possession.

Responding to an invitation from Tamim Chowdhury, Tamim Dari went to Patenga of Chittagong in 2014 and discussed in length scopes of bringing arms and ammunitions to Bangladesh using the sea route to conduct Jihad, claimed the elite force.

But, Tamim Dari managed to get out on bail. The question is: How can someone who is listed as "dangerous criminal" secure his bail?

It was learnt that his lawyer submitted a letter to the court during the bail plea.

International Maritime Training Academy (IMTA) principal captain Zafor Ahmed had written the letter to the director general of shipping department saying that merchant marine officer Tamim Dari is a COC candidate and the law enforcement had picked him up from the IMTA hostel around 5:00am on 26 January 2017.

The RAB said Tamim Dari was arrested along with his aide from the first floor of a six-storey building in Kabirajbagh area of Dania near Jatrabari police station.

Defence lawyers think Tamim secured the bail due to discrepancies between the letter issued by the IMTA and the case statement regarding date and place of his arrest.

The court has derived that the suit was fabricated, said at least two lawyers who checked the case documents.

The RABs director at legal and media wing, Mufti Mahmud Khan declined to tell Prothom Alo anything directly about the arrest and bail of Tamim Dari.

Granting someone a bail is the court's jurisdiction and the RAB has nothing to do about it, he said.

This correspondent spoke to three lawyers regarding 10 such cases. They said the accused in anti-terrorism cases were securing bail due to several kinds of inconsistencies in the documents.

These include showing someone arrested days after picking him up, discrepancies between the real incident and the case statement, failure to prove the relationship between several accused arrested in connection with a case or their involvement with an incident, delayed investigation, and error in the process of filing a case.

Lawyer Mohammad Ali had sought a bail for suspected militant Redwan. Ali told Prothom Alo on 24 March that several unidentified people picked Redwan up from his father's shop at Khatunganj in Chattogram.

There was a video footage of the incident. Redwan's father went to the police station for filing a case, but they did not take the case.

He later filed a special general diary with the court. When a magistrate moved with the investigation following the GD, he found that Redwan had been shown arrested from Hatir Jheel area of Dhaka.

The court decided that Redwan had not got justice, so he was given a bail.

Several defendants, picked up from different places and later presented as a group, have secured their bails for such lack of coherence in the documents furnished by the state.

Last year, the RAB filed a case against Dhaka University student Md Salauddin and Narsingdi Government College student Md Abu Zafar under the anti-terrorism act after nabbing them during an anti-militancy operation at Gabtoli in Narsingdi.

Two from Dhaka, another two from Bagerhat, one from Barguna along with four or five more unidentified people were named the accused in the case statement.

Iqbal Sarkar, the lawyer of the two students, said all whose names were in the statement were later arrested. But, none could provide him with any information about his clients.

Mufti Zafar Amin got bail under similar circumstances. A case, under the anti-terrorism act, was filed against Mufti Amin with the Darus Salam police station in Dhaka on 2 July 2015.

Before this, a case had been filed by Zafar's elder brother Moaz Amin on 30 June with Tangi model police station, stating that two unidentified people had picked Zafar at gun-point from in front of Akayed-e-Madina Madrasa around 4:30pm on 14 June.

But the RAB-2 statement stated that they had arrested Zafar Amin and several others from Shahi Madina Hotel and Restaurant of Sadarghat, Dhaka while they were hatching a plan there.

In primary interrogation, the law enforcement claimed, the accused confessed to their involved with banned militant organisations Al-Qaeda and Islamic State.

They said several of their cohorts would arrive at the airport station from Khulna on that day. With higher authorities' approval they conducted an operation at the airport railway station area taking those arrested with them.

The lawyers said there were several inconsistencies in the elite force's claims. Zafar was shown arrested in Sadarghat, so the case ahd to be filed with Kotwali police station. Instead, RAB filed the case with Darus Salam station.

In another case in Dinajpur in 2010, all of the accused got bail for a procedural loophole. Cases under the anti-terrorism act were to be prosecuted at the session's judge court and it was mandatory for the court to seek the permission of the home ministry before the trial.

The court identified itself as an anti-terrorism tribunal in the documents and did not take the approval of the home ministry before the trial.

Another case was filed against a man on 26 November 2007 for running from the Comilla jail. The highest punishment in such cases is 10 years' imprisonment. But, the case was not disposed off in 10 years and the accused got bail.

Several lawyers at the High Court said the charge sheet in a case filed under the anti-terrorism act has to be issued in 120 days .

But, the law enforcement are not following this rule. They do not even submit regular updates. The accused are getting bails as the cases are pending for days.

Additional inspector general of police Shafiqur Rahman, who heads the anti-terrorism cell, however, claimed it was not true that the accused were picked up first and shown arrested much later.

The accused are arrested on specific charges and the media widely publicise the events, he added.

Defending the delay in investigation, he said that the militants are not like other criminals. It is hard to arrest them and get information from them.

"They only open up when a trustworthy relationship is formed, which requires time," he further said.

The senior police official said they have sent a proposal to the government asking a special tribunal be formed for prosecution of cases under the anti-terrorism act.

The police think, the court prosecutes the militant defendants' cases just the way they prosecute the other defendants' cases. So, they do not want to understand the delay in such cases.

Security analyst brigadier general Sakhawat Hossain said, it is hard to get information about militant attacks not only in Bangladesh but also all over the world. It is tough to arrest them and make them talk.

In many countries special courts prosecute such crimes. Bangladesh also needs that.

"However, very often the law enforcement allegedly pick people up and show them arrested days later. This makes the cases weak and the real militants reap the benefits," he observed.

*This piece, originally published in Prothom Alo print edition, has been rewritten in English by Shameem Reza and Nusrat Nowrin.