Washington File

Part Two from Shamim Chowdhury:

I do understand many of these forums do not understand the depth of this man’s heinous crime that he committed on the fateful night of 15th August of 1975. Many are supporting him because of their stand against death by hanging. I will fervently request those brothers, I do deeply respect and understand you stand on your moral value on death sentence issue but to achieve that please do not find him guilty of murder of man women and children! I will argue your stand should be that he is a cold-blooded murderer of innocent human bean but you want that justice should be served some other way then death by hang.

I hope none of you who are now supporting this murderous man support murder of innocent women and children. If so, please do not show your sympathy for an inhuman criminal but show your sympathy to people who was murdered by Mr. Mohiuddin and his man.

Please do not insult our judgment; we may be not wealthy as nation or powerful but we are proud that we are Bangladeshi who believe in justice, which may be not your way but certainly our way. We respect your values but allow us to be respected even if we disagreed.

Sincerely
Shamim Chowdhury

Part One from Shamim Chowdhury

Mr. Mohiuddin is no great champion of humanity but just the opposite a brutal killer of men, women, child (10 years), pregnant women even house help persons.

The courts in Bangladesh are not kangaroo court by any means.
In addition, the assertion of he will be taken from airport tarmac to the gallows is absolutely falls. Mr. Mohiuddin and his colleague who has been found guilty six years ago are still in jail in good condition as the case is now hanging with supreme court in Bangladesh. Start of the trial in 1997 to this 2007, which is ten years, now proves that government wanted to allow ample of time to pursue every bit of information to make sure no one is prosecuted without a proper trail.

Mr. Mohiuddin had and still have ample of time to stand for trial and defend him self.

There are close to dozens of army and civilians who was charge sheeted with this crime has found not guilty by the same court who found Mr. Mohiuddin guilty which proves the impartiality of the court.

Sincerely
Shamim Chowdhury

I write regarding my father's deportatioon status. Unfortunately,
there is no good news to report. The federal judge ruled to lift the TRO on the deportation based on his lack of jurisdiction. The deportation order stands and we have been given 24 hours - my father will be sent back as soon as tomorrow evening (Thursday).

With all the support from US Congress members and Canadian parliament members, along with Amnesty International and various NGO's, Homeland Security has chosen to continue the process of deportation and return my father to Bangladesh. It is my opinion that it is quite apparent there are bigger interests at hand in regards to international/foreign policy between the US and Bangladesh and amidst all of this, my father is just a pawn in a much larger political game.

As you can understand, the next few days are going to be difficult and traumatic for both myself and my famly. My mother has decided to travel to Bangladesh with my father. There is a possibility that my sister and I will never see our parents again.

At this time we will continue to fight in bangladesh - they HAVE to give him a retrial, a fair trial.

Thank you to all of you who have supported my fathers cause.

Sincerely,

Rouben

As an American citizen, I feel regret that we have system that is not be able to set such a situation straight on it's own.

No one who wasn't present during the coup can know whether Mohiuddin Ahmed did anything but perform his military orders blocking cars. This is true for people in this hemisphere and Benladesh.

We do know that when opponents take over from adversaries they often take revenge. It is true on this continent and around the world. The degree of the revenge varies, but in this situation, the daughter of the slain President is now back in power. Can her regime be likely to provide fair justice?

The US authorities can and should try to keep the possibility of pure revenge from governing the fate of a man whose immediate US neighbors feel is a good and decent person. I know a few of these former neighbors, and they are fine trustworthy people.

I would hope that my country can see its way clear to do the right thing by asking our Canadian friends to help us find a more humane solution than an unfair death sentence.

There is one fact in Mr. Champ's article that has an importance that seems to have eluded the commentators thus far. That fact is the size of Major Ahmed's command. If Mohiuddin Ahmed was a Major at the time of the coup, he would not command a platoon. A platoon is 30 soldiers commanded by a Lieutenant, and a Major would command a company of 3 platoons, or even a battalion of 5 companies. The only way a Major would command a platoon is if it was a detachment of some sort with a particularly important mission. This would be consistent with the government's version of events, that Major Mohiuddin Ahmed commanded and personally led a murder detachment as part of a coup d'etat. To be fair,it may be that Mr. Champ got the rank or the size of the unit wrong. That being said, if Mohiuddin Ahmed is a murderer, does Canada want to shelter him?

I do not believe that the death penalty is a valid punishment as it is absolute, whereas the justice systems which hand down these sentences are fallible. (Hello, David Milgaard.)

That Mr. Ahmed chose to stay in America rather than face his accusers indicates to me that he may be guilty.

On the other hand, the decision by the Bangladeshi court to try and convict him in absentia shows me that his decision to stay away was wise and that the purpose of his trial may have been revenge, not justice. Where is the justice in such proceedings?

I believe this situation, where Mr. Ahmed has been tried and convicted without being allowed a defense, calls for an international court to rule on this matter objectively.

I certainly do not think that Mr. Ahmed should be sent to the gallows with only the pretense of a fair trial supporting his conviction.

I believe that international tribunals must be established to deal with matters such as this one and others, such as the case against Chinese banker Gao Shan. This will ensure a fair trial, and a fair punishment, for offenders, rather than the current situation, where Canada may be providing a safe haven for foreign criminals.

I applaud Canada's resistance to the death penalty, but I do not believe that allowing potential criminals to walk free is a fair compromise.

I am a Bangladeshi, and I was in Dhaka during the Coup in 1975. Everybody in Dhaka knew what happened on that day and who was involved. Mohiuddin was a member of the team who took part in killing. Lot of books written and ducumentaries made on that event and role of Mohiuddin is well documented.
These group of people done a irreparable damage to this new country. Bangladesh was born through a civil war 1971. Sheikh Mujib started the process to establish Bnagldesh as a free secular country. He declared secularism as a state principle. But these people killed him and tried to convert Bangladesh to taliban style theocratic country, The government supported by leaders of the coup (Mohiuddin is one of them) scrapped the policy of the secularism, and declared Bangladesh as a Islamic country. Bnagldesh is still haunted by Islamic fanaticism initiated on that day.

It is not true that Mohiuddin will be sent to firing squad from tarmac in Dhaka. Infact, none of the accused of that case is hanged yet. They were tried in civil court, opportunity to appeal in higher courts still open.

While I apprecite Canada as a champion of human rights, I don't see any reason why Canada should provide asylum to these cold blooded murderers. When you provide shelter to a criminal, you are undermining the rights of a victim to receive justice. That is also one kind of violation of human rights.

I have known Din and his family for most of my life, and know him to be a kind, principled man. He's lived peacefully as a law-abiding citizen and there is no threat to anyone posed by his entering Canada.

Like most of us, I don't know exactly what happened that night in 1975. I do believe that the coup was necessary to save Bangladesh from a demogogue. In any case, the officers were all acting under orders from their superiors.

Thirty years later, we're still debating this because Hasina got into power and used the court system for personal revenge. Din never got a fair trial. We should stop this diplomatic dance and let Din enter Canada so he can peacefully live out the rest of his life.

I totally understand the desire for justice on the part of Mrs. Hasina and her family. I would want that too for my family. Justice appeases the souls but revenge only keeps stirring things up for ever.
Justice means that the punishment has to fit the crime. Death penalty is never justice, it's revenge, an eye for an eye.
There are plenty of circumstances in the story of Mr. Ahmed and his involvment in the '75 coup to make death penalty look as an absolutely intollerable, unreasonable and vindictive punishment. Not suitable for ANY civilized country, especially the US.
I hope the US goverment understands that two wrongs don't make a right and allows Mr. Ahmed to go to Canada, or any other third country, where his life will be spared. From there he can continue his battle in defending himself and clearing up his name.
I also hope that Mrs. Hasina receives justice too, but in her position of politician she has to offer justice FIRST. Not justice for herself, justice for all.

Henry, As usual a thoughtful and balanced article. Ahmed will be executed if the US deports him to Bangladesh and as there are family in Canada who will support him as well as having a policy of not extraditing to a country where the death penalty is still applied, it is our obligation to offer sanctuary.

Would we then have the notorious Mr.Clifford Olsen sent to another country to live freely?
I think not! Think about this, don't you think we *Canada* are letting our "compassion" run amoke?

Mr Champ,

This case is not one that should be decided by Courts anymore..Certainly not Courts in Bangladesh, which have had, since inception, close ties (to say the least) with the political powers in charge at the time..It is just not possible to reasonnably agree with a Bangladeshi Court's decision over a Political matter as Ms Hasina is in power...
Just like it was impossible to agree with most of the Soviets Courts decisions involving political considerations.. In spite of a very proper Judiciary system.
Just like it is impossible to agree with the Chinese Courts decisions regarding the Falun Gong participants they try.

You are a journalist..Well informed.. You know that Justice is an elusive thing, even in the USA which condemns more innocent people than most so called evolved nations..
(May I refer you to Grisham's "An Innocent Man")..

So anything coming out of Bangladesh, involving the murder of the nation's founder, and directed by his daughter..... What can I say....It is just not credible...Revenge is not Justice.

Terry

Does not matter that he is not a clean person. He was involved in the coup and killed a 7 years old innocent boy, and killed the father of the nation of new nation. How could you people justified that killer should be given the permission in Canada, when Canada denied visa for Winnie Mandela. Was not she denied of a Visa because of killing a person in SA then why a child killer should be in Canada on humanitarian ground? What is the basis?

Your report makes Mr. Mohiuddin a hero and the victim, Sk. Mujib as the guilty one. When you are going to write what happened when these army thugs massacred the entire family.

Because of the double standard of this so-called western world, so-called developing nations are losing their faith on you. Moreover, I think ignorant journalist like you makes it worse.

Nation of hypocrites.

As a second generation American Jew, I had always felt proud to live in a country with ethical underpinnings, a fair and just court system, and a tradition of offering refugess of all kinds a safe harbor. I am deeply disturbed that my beloved country could even consider sending this innocent man home to certain death. Can it be possible that we could allow such an injustice?

I hope and pray that our government come to its senses before it is too late.

It is fundamentally wrong, no matter where you sit on the death penalty question, to execute someone, like Din, who was never even in
court during the trial and never had any contact with his court appointed lawyer. In the name of justice, Canadian, American, wherever, Din should not be returned to Bangladesh. I don't understand how Americans can find it in their hearts to send him back to Bangladesh; I don't understand how Canadians, knowing that it will save his life, cannot find it in their hearts to accept him into their country.

Commenters ASSUME Din is innocent based apparently on emotion but if he is wanted for a crime in the country where the crime was commited the US has a responsibility to that country. If somebody had a hand in killing a Canadian I think it would be looked at differently by those north of the border.

Dear Mr. Champ,

I read with great interest your article and found your discussion (on whole) balanced and very refreshing.

The Bangladesh government's behavior is spiteful and inappropriate. They are not seeking justice (since the facts were never presented fairly) and are out to retaliate in a vengeful way. They are acting like bullies to prove their point and scare others watching into submission (how pathetic).

Mr. Ahmed's actions do not warrant a death sentence and the fact that the U.S. has labeled him a 'terrorist' should be cause for pause for each of us. He did not pull the trigger, nor did he take part in the planning. The U.S. government should contact the Canadian Government and have him deported there rather than Bangladesh. Otherwise, Mr. Ahmed's blood will be on our hands.

Din was a neighbor for nearly 10 years and I found him (and his family) to be hardworking, fair minded and geniunely concerned about their neighbors and community. He is intelligent, versatile and would be an asset to the Canadians.

Din's situation can and should be corrected and I hope and pray daily that true justice will be served.

Thank you.

Not sure you could call this article balanced! It appears to be based almost entirely on the views of the well-oiled 'Din' Ahmed spin machine.

There are real human rights issues at stake here - not just with respect to the death penalty. Impunity is another. Regardless of the punishment, there is clearly a case for Din Ahmed to answer. His own statements attest to the fact that he partcipated in the coup. This was a finding of the 9th Circuit Court of appeal when it threw out his application for a review of his deportation.

And finally - who ever came up with the idea that he would be welcome in Canada? I don't know why our US cousins think we are somehow soft. Canada should not be a dumping ground for human-rights abusers who are denied asylum in the US. This should remain a matter between the US and Bangladesh.

The US has no extradition treaty with Bangladesh. And not only does
the US have no legal obligation to extradite Din to Bangladesh, the
US doesn't even have to deport him there. Yes the US must deport Din,
because the US courts denied him political aslyum (because he
assisted others in the coup by manning a roadblock) but the
deportation destination doesn't have to be Bangladesh. It can be
Canada but the US must first ask Canada to help out.

I appreciate the even-handed management of this blog and the thoughtful comments of your correspondents. I have been following Din's story with intense interest, hoping that U.S. Homeland Security officials will recognize their opportunity to remove the "terrorist" label from Din and request Canada to provide him refuge. It is ironic that Canada, not the U.S.A., is in the position to provide justice for Din.

He isn't a Canadian citizen, chose to remain in the US despite their co-operation with Bangladesh, and is a convicted felon in that country. Seems simple enough to me. We can hand wring over the fate of one foreign national of little interest to Canada, or we can concentrate on other issues, such as the rights of a Canadian citizen detained in China, accused of being a terrorist, or of another Canadian citizen, detained in Guantanamo Bay, also accused of being a terrorist. Given my druthers, I'd say let's deal with our own first before anything else. At least one of our people hasn't been convicted of a crime, yet.

The web of bureaucracy is hard to negotiate.
Please, will the U.S. State Dept. ask Canada to receive Din Ahmed?? They are willing for him to come, but must be officially asked.

The U.S. has no extradition treaty with Bangladesh.

Canada is willing and able to receive him.

Where to start? Partition, cutting the bulk of Bengal off from its metropolis? Bhutto, stealing elections and thus precipitating the break-up of Pakistan? The "warring widows" who have definitely turned Bangladesh into a sick joke? Is any of this actually our problem, particularly when we take no action over an actual Canadian citizen languishing in the American gulag, and, as European report now has it, were party to a Nato agreement facilitating "rendition" flights?

I certainly don't know the answers.

The difficulty, as I see it, is that if we rigorously apply our laws on asylum, persons in need of protection, &c, I would suspect that on any fair reading half the world's population deserves refuge in Canada.

The principle of these laws is, in my opinion, clearly sound, but the practical outcome of their application is, well, frought, leading on the one side to a huge influx of 'huddled masses' which would not necessarily be to our benefit, on the other a clear statement that the laws mean nothing and that utter hypocrisy rules.

That is our quandry. I have no particular interest in this Bengal Lancer, he is only one of uncounted millions who face (it is said) injustice through no fault of ours. Is it our duty to save him, and the others?....

Cheers,
dba

MT: Not sure what the legal reasons would be. It seems that the fact he used to live in Canada, and that he has family currently living in Canada would be the only reasons.

At any rate, the point is that I and other Canadian citizens are asking the government to take this guy in as a refugee, fleeing a country that would otherwise persecute (or in this case execute) him.

Other countries can't simply deport undesirables to Canada, we have to accept them as refugees.

Mr. Din contributed to our community in Venice, CA. He has family in Canada and speaks French and English. He has raised two children and has a wife. The Canadian government has empathy for such foreign government affairs. Let Din go to the land that would have originally accepted his situation.

Thank you for your balanced story on this difficult situation. I am certain no one would want to have to face criminal charges in a Bangladeshi court (either now or in 1996), where the concept of 'due process' and the standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt' are not applied. I can understand the pain and sadness which must be felt by the family and supporters of those who were killed during the August, 1975 military coup. But at what point do you stop the bloodshed? How many more people (innocent or guilty) must die before this senseless need for revenge will end? I vote that it end now. I implore my government to contact the Canadian authorities and allow Din to join his family in Canada.

There is no reason to deport Din to Bangladesh, where he would be killed for revenge for a crime he never committed. Bangladesh is one of the most corrupt countries on Earth, and their judicial proceedings primarily reflect the interests and emotions of the rulers. The US does not even have an extradition treaty with them! As a former neighbor of Din's, I urge the US government to deport him to a neutral country such as Canada, instead.

I also want to thank you for a balanced article. I know Din as a neighbor here in California. I, like many, didn't know the details of his life, and can only hope that his story is the correct one. However, I am extremely disheartened by the word terrorist being used in this way to apply to anyone's enemies. I pray that someday the USA will ban the death penalty and join civilized nations that will not extradite persons to countries that still employ it, in their own version of terrorism.
Douglas

I definitely don't support the death penalty, but I do have a few concerns about this. For one thing, what exactly is Canada's involvement with this case? I understand that IF this man was in Canada, he would not be allowed to be deported back to Bangladesh - but why would he be sent here in the first place? His crimes were committed in Bangladesh, and he was captured by the US .... what exactly would be the legal reason for the US to 'deport' a Bangladeshi to Canada? And what does this say to other countries? 'Hey, got a problem you don't want to deal with - send it Canada!'

It is one thing to protect people being deported FROM Canada ... but to bring someone into Canada, just to take advantage of relaxed laws ... ?

Dear Mr.Champ,
I read with great interest your article.
I think that revenge has nothing to do with justice. And I'm afraid Din is just a victim. I hope your Country could do what is right and show that "Justice" is not only a word.
Thank for any help.

I cannot understand why the US would not send this man to Canada. There is no extradition treaty between Bangladesh and the US.
Ahmed has lived in the US for the past 11 years coexisting as peacefully as he could under the circumstances. The US has a duty to sustain philanthropic action. Ahmed did not get a fair trial in Bangladesh and the US judicial system has relied on the inaccurate evidence the Bangladesh government supplied the US when considering his asylum request. The documents submitted by the Bangladeshi government were tampered with and altered upon translation. This is a gross negligence.
We should not, under any circumstances, send a man to his death in a country whose transparency is currently in question? Presently, the state of affairs in bangladesh is unstable and corruption is rampant.

Dear Mr. Champ,

I just want to say thank you for writing this non-biased article on Mr. Mohiuddin Ahmeds case. It is important the people know the truth about the 1996 case against Mr. Mohiuddin.

Eyewitnesses in Bangladesh can be easily intimidated and bought. Bangladesh is, and was, plagued by police and judicial corruption, torture for confession, torture for testimony and outright killings in the street by authorities and political thugs. This killings, or as the Bengali like to call them “crossfire”, are a frequent occurrence and if you voice opposition against the political party in power you can get killed in the street or tortured in jail.

Mohiuddin Ahmed is a common name in Bangladesh and there was frequent confusion in the trial as to who was being talked about, Din or someone else with that same name.

Other defense attorneys were openly harassed and threatened just for trying to defend their clients. One female defense attorney was even attacked while on the court premises.

The Awami League, which was the political party behind Din’s 1996 trial, orchestrated violent intimidating demonstrations outside the court house to let everyone know, if a guilty verdict was not reached, there would be blood in the streets. And violence and intimidation by Sheikh Hasina and her Awami League continue to this day. On April 11th the BBC reported Bangladesh police have filed murder charges against Hasina for masterminding the murder of political opponents during street violence in Dhaka last October.

See www.freedin.org for all pdfs mentioned.

Rouben Mohiuddin

Din was not in Bangladesh during the trial. He was tried, in absentia, and his, Awami League, appointed attorney never called any witnesses in Din’s defense. He never objected to any testimony against Din and this lawyer never contacted Din in America even though Din could have been easily found living in Los Angeles. US Govt knew Din’s whereabouts at all times because, at the time of the Bangladesh trial, Din’s application for political asylum was winding its way through the US courts. He had work permits to work legally in America and he paid his taxes like anyone else. Din was not hiding. He was completely reachable. The Bangladeshi government had ongoing communications with the US INS regarding the status of Din’s case, and the submission of documents from the in absentia trial. Nonetheless, the Bangladeshi government appointed lawyer never made any attempts to contact Din, or defend him at trial.

A soldier testified against Din who was not even in the army when the killings took place. In fact, he testified during the in absentia trial that he joined the military AFTER the coup! If he wasn’t even in the army when the military coup happened, how could he have been in the president’s home to have seen Din kill anyone? Nonetheless, his testimony was allowed as relevant to the trial, and worthy of evidentiary weight. Witness#11.pdf

Please see www.freedin.org to see the pdf files.

to be continued -

Rouben

I know it’s hard for many people to believe a political party in power can have such intense influence on the judicial process that the defendant can not get a fair trial. But that was the case in 1996 when Din was tried, in absentia, in Bangladesh.

Here are just some of the reasons why I believe Din did not get a fair trial:

21 years passed before there was an investigation into the killings that occurred during the night of the military coup in 1975. There was no physical evidence linking Din to the crime, and, after all that time, any eyewitness testimony against Din is highly suspect. According to various reports, many of them highly suspect, over 100 men stormed the president’s home, all wearing the standard black uniform and black beret of the Bangladeshi army. Since these killings happened in the middle of the night, under a highly charged atmosphere, we believe any eyewitness testimony has to be seriously placed in doubt, 21 years after the fact.

The entire trial was orchestrated by Sheikh Hasina, the daughter of the slain president, and her Awami League political party. They picked the judges in Din’s case and they picked his defense attorney in Bangladesh.

Rouben

Isn't it better to deport Ahmed to Canada than send him to Bangladesh to be executed for a crime nobody is sure he committed? That's the thing about the death penalty, you can't take it back.

I don't pretend to know all the facts of this case, but one thing is very apparent to me. The divergent opinions are so far apart, and the truths believed so opposed to one another, that the situation demands a calm, reasoned reconsideration. The rhetoric is heated, emotions are high, and everyone wants "justice." What form that takes should be considered very carefully. As civilized people, we must do all we can to ensure that all doubts are dispelled before we act.

I know there are a lot of Bangladeshi in Canada, who for the past 31 years, have only heard the Hasina and Awami League side of story regarding the August '75 coup. But I found a website by Ahmed that points out a lot of facts Hasina doesn't want the public to read. Like how one prosecution witness testified he saw Ahmed shooting the president that night in Aug of 75, but then, later in testimony of that same witness, the witness admits he didn't join the army until a month after the coup. So how could he see him in August? That website is www.freedin.org

Thank you for the balanced article on Mohiuddin Ahmed and his fight to save his life by being deported to Canada.

Even if a person is for the death penalty I think that person would have to agree that it is fundamentally wrong to execute someone, like Ahmed, who was never even at his own trial and who never had any contact with his court appointed lawyer. The US knows that deporting Ahmed to Bangladesh is the same as executing him. And Bangladesh is just as corrupt now as it was during the 1996 trial.

By the way, you got one important fact wrong that most people get wrong: the United States does not have an extradition treaty with Bangladesh. The US does not even have to deport Ahmed to Bangladesh. The US has the power to ask a third country, like Canada, if it will take him in. And if the US asks Canada for help in this matter, I hope Canada does the right thing and says yes.

Unfortunately we've seen in the past that the US is quick to label somebody a terrorist, without having any proof. I think that's what happened to Ahmed. The US State dept never did any independent investigation of the case. They only accepted what they were told by Hasina and the Awami league. Well you don't have to look far in today's newspapers to see that Hasina can't be trusted for one minute.

Canada doesn't have to decide if Ahmed is guilty or innocent. Canada only has to do the humanitarian thing and right this wrong.

Steve,

You are right...there is no formal extradition treaty between the U.S.and Bangladesh. Apparently the Clinton administration agreed with Hasina during a visit she made to the White House that the U.S. would deport anyone that Dhaka said was connected to the murder of her father.

Thanks for the fact check....h