Carlile to focus on ‘rule of law’ in Khaleda legal battle

Lord Carlile, a Queen’s Counsel appointed by the BNP to fight for the release of BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia, will utilise his expertise in international financial crimes.

In an interview with Prothom Alo, he said his engagement with Khaleda’s team of lawyers is a professional one and giving her legal advice does not in any way contradict his position as a lord.

As a politician he stands by his earlier criticism of the procedure in International Crimes Tribunal that tried war criminals of 1971 but termed the allegation that he had acted as Jamaat-e-Islami spokesperson as untrue and defamatory.

Lord Carlile was asked what role he would play that Khaleda Zia’s local lawyers cannot.

“The international Rule of Law perspective, with a focus on the independence of the Court from government, and on the separation of powers, should prove useful. In addition, I am an expert on international financial crime,” he said.

Asked if he would mediate any dialogue between the opposition BNP and ruling Awami League, as he tried earlier, the British lawyer said, “If possible. That is an entirely different role.”
Here is the full text of the interview with Lord Carlile:
Prothom Alo (PA): At a press conference in Dhaka on Tuesday (20 March), the secretary general of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, announced that you have been appointed to advice party chief Khaleda Zia’s lawyers on cases against her, who is currently in jail after being convicted in a graft case. Mr. Alamgir also said, you will advise the BNP chief’s legal team on 36 cases against her and if necessary you will visit Bangladesh.

Is this statement true?

Lord Carlile (LC): Yes.

PA: What sort of relation is this - commercial or charitable?

LC: It is a professional engagement as a Queen’s Counsel. I shall be paid proportionate fees. The amount is confidential, as is normal.

PA: My understanding is, as a member of the House of Lords you have the responsibility to maintain impartiality in foreign politics. Do you think advising Khaleda Zia’s lawyers is contradictory to the doctrine of Lords’ impartiality?

LC: There is no such obligation or responsibility. Though a member of the House of Lords, I am entitled to carry on my professional practice as a Queen’s Counsel. This brief is received solely in my professional capacity.

PA: What about your role as a mediator to organise dialogue between Bangladeshi political parties, especially your effort to hold dialogue between BNP and Awami League in order to resolve the political crisis and differences in Bangladesh? Are you still going to play that role?

LC: If possible. That is an entirely different role.

PA: How is your decision to take up the job from BNP compatible with your position in Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, where you have been appointed as the chairman for regional office recently?

LC: It is completely compatible. The CHRI does not in any way inhibit my professional practice.

PA: Will you share your experience or knowledge on Bangladesh's legal system, please?

LC: The system is derived from the Common Law, as is frequently the situation in the Commonwealth. I have studied the system with interest for some time. I am part of a team, which includes very distinguished local lawyers.

PA: What role can you play for the imprisoned Khaleda Zia that her Bangladeshi lawyers are unable to do?

LC: The international Rule of Law perspective, with a focus on the independence of the Court from government, and on the separation of powers, should prove useful. In addition, I am an expert on international financial crime.

PA: Do you have any plan to visit Bangladesh?

LC: Yes - when useful or required.

PA: You openly criticised the 'International Crimes Tribunal' in Bangladesh. You questioned the judgement of the ICT a few times.

LC: I did, because procedurally it did not follow a procedure regarded as fair by international jurists. I did so as a Parliamentarian and politician.

PA: On what capacity did you do that? Also people say you acted as the spokesperson of Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh.

LC: That is totally untrue, and actually defamatory. I speak for no political party either in Bangladesh or, for that matter, in the UK.