Chankharpul killings: Chief prosecutor says unhappy with verdict, will appeal for harsher sentences
“We believe the death sentences given to the three senior officers are appropriate, but the sentencing of those who directly fired shots needs to be challenged,” he said.
The prosecution of the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) has expressed dissatisfaction with the verdict in a crimes against humanity case over the killing of protesters in the capital's Chankharpul area on 5 August 2024 and announced plans to appeal seeking harsher punishment.
ICT Chief Prosecutor Mohammad Tajul Islam made the announcement at a press briefing today (26 January) following the delivery of the verdict.
He said that during the "March to Dhaka" programme on 5 August 2024, police opened indiscriminate fire on freedom-seeking students and members of the public as they advanced through the Chankharpul area, killing six people. A case was filed over the incident, and the charges against the accused were proven.
The tribunal sentenced three accused to death. However, those who directly fired shots – some of whom were seen doing so in video footage and were carrying rifles without authorised issuance – received lighter sentences. One was sentenced to six years in prison, another to four years, and three constables to three years each.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
"We believe these sentences are not just," the chief prosecutor said, adding that while court orders must be respected, the prosecution would appeal against the lighter sentences. "As there is an Appellate Division, we will file an appeal on behalf of the prosecution after receiving the full verdict and reviewing it in detail."
He said the light sentences were inconsistent with justice, considering the loss of young lives during the July uprising.
"We believe the death sentences given to the three senior officers are appropriate, but the sentencing of those who directly fired shots needs to be challenged," he said.
Responding to a question on whether the prosecution would seek the death penalty for all five accused, Tajul Islam said the prosecution would seek capital punishment for each of them.
"During the July Uprising, thousands of rounds were fired, leaving 1,400 martyrs and thousands injured. In crimes against humanity cases, it is not necessary to prove whose bullet killed whom.
"No one can escape punishment due to the absence of such proof – this is an internationally recognised legal principle," he said, adding that the current sentencing did not meet international standards.
Asked why one accused, Sujan, received only a three-year sentence, the chief prosecutor said the court acknowledged that Sujan fired shots and acted with enthusiasm, all of which the prosecution had proven.
"However, the court considered that he was a constable acting under orders from superiors, and on that basis reduced the sentence. We disagree with that assessment," he said.
He added that the superiors who issued orders were sentenced to death under the principle of command responsibility, as they failed to restrain or punish their subordinates and instead issued orders to fire. Their assets were also confiscated.
On whether the tribunal law allows for lighter sentences, Tajul said the law permits the tribunal to award the death penalty or other punishments once guilt is proven.
"The key question is whether the punishment is appropriate to the crime. We believe it is not, which is why we are considering an appeal," he said, noting that appeals must be filed within 30 days of the verdict under the law.
