Prosecutor’s remarks on army officers’ jobs misquoted, chief prosecutor’s office claims
Media outlets misquoted remarks made by prosecutor Gazi Monowar Hossain Tamim regarding the employment status of army officers accused in crimes against humanity cases, the Chief Prosecutor’s Office of the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) has claimed.
Prosecutor Abdullah Al Noman circulated a document signed by administrative officer Md Masud Rana of the chief prosecutor’s office to journalists covering the tribunal via a WhatsApp group on Monday.
The document was titled “Prosecution statement regarding media reports on Section 20(c) of the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 (as amended).”
The statement said the report titled “15 army officers accused remain employed until army headquarters enforces the law: Prosecutor”, published recently in various media outlets, had drawn the attention of the Chief Prosecutor’s Office.
It stated that prosecutor Monowar Hossain’s comments were “misquoted and distorted,” creating a “misleading impression” that the law had not yet been enforced or that its implementation depended on the decision of army authorities—claims the office said were inconsistent with both fact and law.
Prosecutor Monowar Hossain’s comments were reported and broadcast by several media outlets on Sunday.
Prothom Alo’s online edition published the report on 26 October under the headline “15 army officers accused remain employed until army headquarters enforces the law: Prosecutor”, while the print edition on 27 October carried the headline “They may be considered serving.”
The report was based on an answer of the prosecutor in response to a question a journalist asked during a briefing at the ICT premises on Sunday. Prothom Alo had quoted both the journalist’s question and the prosecutor’s answer verbatim.
The journalist had asked, “Please clarify one thing. You’re saying some of the accused army officers are retired and some are serving. But when the law was amended, it was said that once formal charges are taken into cognisance, their service ends. So should we say they are retired, dismissed, or serving?”
In response, prosecutor Monowar Hossain said, “The interpretation lies in what the law states. Now, the army headquarters will decide when to apply this law to them. Until it is applied, it can be said they are serving.”
Referring to that comment, the chief prosecutor’s office said the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 takes precedence over all other laws.
It added that prosecutor Gazi Monowar’s remarks merely referred to procedural aspects of enforcement, which is not a legal interpretation.
The chief prosecutor’s office urged that, “for the sake of factual accuracy and legal clarity,” media outlets issue a corrective and explanatory report, emphasising the need for accuracy and responsibility in reporting on sensitive judicial matters to prevent public misunderstanding.
Following the release of this clarification, prosecutor Monowar Hossain could not be reached for comment. No prosecutors held their usual post-hearing briefing at the tribunal on Monday either.
The interim government amended the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 before launching trials for crimes against humanity committed during the July uprising. The amendment introduced a provision barring any individual formally charged with such crimes from holding government employment.
On 22 October, the International Crimes Tribunal sent 15 army officers accused in three crimes against humanity cases to prison. After the formal charges were filed, the officers—then serving in the Bangladesh Army—were kept in military custody at Dhaka Cantonment before being produced in court. They are now being held in a sub-jail within the cantonment.