Unconvinced with replies over why they should not be charged with contempt of court, International Crimes Tribunal-2 yesterday initiated the proceedings against 23 of 49 eminent persons who had issued a statement expressing concern over Dhaka-based British journalist David Bergman's sentence for demeaning it.

It asked those currently in Bangladesh to appear on April 23 and reply on or before that day why they should not be punished.

If convicted, the 23 may face the highest one year's imprisonment or a fine of up to Tk 5,000 or both.

The tribunal also cleared of the charge another person, Rezaur Rahman, one of the remaining 26, whose unconditional apologies were accepted and who were exonerated earlier in four phases including yesterday's.

Justice Obaidul Hassan viewed it appropriate to charge the 23 “makers of the impugned statement”...“for protecting authority and dignity of the tribunal and to keep the notion of administration of justice untainted in the mind of public”.

The charge has been brought “under section 11(4) of the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act-1973” said Justice Hassan leading the three-member tribunal, including Justice Md Mozibur Rahman Miah and Justice Md Shahinur Islam.

The 23 are Masud Khan, Afsan Chowdhury, Ziaur Rahman, Hana Shams Ahmed, Anu Muhammad, Anusheh Anadil, Muktasree Chakma Sathi, Lubna Marium, Farida Akhter, Shireen Huq, Zafrullah Chowdhury, Ali Ahmed Ziauddin, Rahnuma Ahmed, Shahdul Alam, CR Abrar, Bina D'Costa, Mahmud Rahman, Zarina Nahar Kabir, Leesa Gazi, Shabnam Nadiya, Nasrin Siraj Annie, Tibra Ali and Delwar Hussain.

On December 2, 2014, the tribunal found Bergman, editor (special reports) of New Age, guilty of contempt for two of his blog posts of January 2013 on the verdict of Abul Kalam Azad, known as Bachchu Razakar.

He was sentenced to imprisonment “till rising of the court” that day and fined Tk 5,000.

On December 20, 2014, the daily Prothom Alo ran a report titled “50 people express concern over Bergman's punishment” on the basis of the statement, which observed that the tribunal's order would restrict freedom of expression.

One signatory, Khusi Kabir, later withdrew her name.

On January 14 the tribunal asked the 49 signatories to explain the statement.

“Prima facie it appears that the core content of the 'statement' questions 'transparency and openness' of the judicial proceedings before the tribunal and also justification of the order sentencing a journalist [Bergman] for the act of scandalising the tribunal constituting the offence of contempt,” it said.