Trial of Joy and Palak begins for crimes against humanity
The International Crimes Tribunal has framed charges against ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s son Sajeeb Wazed Joy and former ICT State Minister Junaid Ahmed Palak in a case of crimes against humanity for genocide by shutting down the internet during the July uprising. The trial of the case has officially begun.
Today, Wednesday (January 21), the three-member Tribunal-1 headed by Justice Golam Mortaza Majumder issued the order rejecting their plea for exemption. At the same time, it has fixed February 18 for the opening statement and recording of the testimony of the state. The other two members of the tribunal are Justice Md. Shafiul Alam Mahmud and retired District and Sessions Judge Md. Mohitul Haque Enam Chowdhury.
Junaid Ahmed Palak was present in the tribunal today. During the framing of charges, he was asked whether he was guilty in the case. In response, he pleaded not guilty and prayed for justice. At that time, Sajeeb Wazed Joy was represented by state-appointed lawyer Manjur Alam and lawyer M. Liton and lawyer M. Liton was represented by Junaid Ahmed Palak. Earlier, on January 15, the tribunal fixed today as the day to order the framing of charges in the case.
The tribunal framed three charges against the two of them. The charges are: Palak had incited on Facebook on the night of July 14, 2024, at the behest of Joy. In view of this, on July 15, the police, Awami League and Chhatra League armed forces attacked the protesters at various places including Dhaka University. In addition, they blocked the internet and incited and incited them to use deadly weapons. At the same time, they assisted in the killings. As a result, 28 people including Russell and Mosleh Uddin were martyred in the attack by the police and party terrorist forces. The third charge is that they assisted in the killing of 34 people in Uttara.
The court ordered Joy to surrender on December 10 for crimes against humanity in this incident. Palak was produced on the day of his arrest. The court considered the formal complaint filed by the state on December 4.
