Shishir Monir: Verdict Based on Hearsay Evidence
Following the High Court's verdict in the August 21 grenade attack case, Mohammad Shishir Monir, a lawyer representing the defendants, criticized the trial process. He stated that the High Court ruled the judicial court's trial to be illegal, as it relied heavily on hearsay evidence rather than firsthand testimony. Monir emphasized that no one had directly witnessed the events, and the court found no collaboration between any of the witnesses.
The High Court acquitted all the accused in the case, including Tarique Rahman, Acting Chairperson of the BNP, and former state minister for Home Affairs Lutfozzaman Babar, on Sunday. The verdict was delivered by a bench comprising Justice AKM Asaduzzaman and Justice Syed Enayet Hossain.
In the original judicial court's judgment, 49 individuals were convicted, with 19 sentenced to death, 19 given life sentences, and the remainder receiving various prison terms. However, the High Court allowed all appeals, declared the judicial court's verdict improper, and acquitted all defendants.
Monir argued that the trial was unlawful because it was not grounded in proper legal procedure. He pointed out that the convictions were based solely on hearsay evidence, and that there was no direct evidence from witnesses who had seen the incident unfold. He also noted that the court rejected the death reference appeals, ultimately acquitting all the accused, including Tarique Rahman and Lutfozzaman Babar.
The High Court further remarked that confessional statements taken from the accused had been extracted through torture. Monir also pointed to the case of Mufti Hannan, who had made two confessional statements, with the court noting that the second confession was retracted and lacked legal validity, as there was no precedent for convicting anyone based solely on a second retracted confession in the 400-year history of the Indian subcontinent.
