Niko trial gets go-ahead

The High Court yesterday cleared the way for trial proceedings to resume in the Niko corruption case against Khaleda Zia.

It also ordered the BNP chief to surrender before the trial court within two months after its verdict reaches the trial court. 

The court gave the order rejecting Khaleda's petition that had challenged the legality of the opening and proceeding of the case filed eight years ago.

The HC bench of Justice Md Nuruzzaman and Justice Zafar Ahmed also directed the trial court to consider the former prime minister's bail petition, on condition that she did not misuse the bail.

In another development yesterday, a special court in Dhaka fixed July 23 for the hearing of two other graft cases against the BNP chairperson.

Judge Abu Ahmed Jamadar of the Special Judge Court-3 came up with the order in presence of Khaleda in response to her two petitions, seeking adjournment of Zia Charitable Trust and Zia Orphanage Trust graft cases.

Khaleda denies all the charges and maintains the cases are politically motivated.

The Anti-Corruption Commission filed the Niko graft case in December 2007 over charges that Khaleda and several others abused power to award a gas exploration and extraction deal to Canadian company Niko when she was PM between 2001 and 2006.

Former law minister Moudud Ahmed, former state minister for energy AKM Mosharraf Hossain, former acting energy secretary Khandaker Shahidul Islam and Kashem Sharif, vice-president (South Asia) of Niko Resources Bangladesh Ltd, were also sued in the case.

Following a petition, the HC in July 2008 stayed the case and issued a rule on the ACC and the government to explain why the initiation and proceeding of the case should not be declared illegal.

In its yesterday's verdict, the HC said there were elements of “committing misconducts and abetting offences” in the case, and the lower court would examine the allegations against her.

ACC lawyer Khurshid Alam Khan told The Daily Star that the commission approved and filed the case in accordance with the law and that the trial court would resume proceedings after receiving the HC verdict.

Proceedings against other accused in the case also remain halted following stay orders by the High Court. The ACC will take steps for vacating those orders as well, he added.

Khaleda's counsel Mahbub Uddin Khokon told reporters that his client may challenge the HC verdict with the Supreme Court.

HEARING AT SPECIAL COURT-3

Khaleda entered the courtroom at Bakshibazar around 10:35am for hearing in the Zia Orphanage Trust and Zia Charitable Trust cases, involving misappropriation of over Tk 5 crore from the two trusts.

Her lawyers told the court that they had moved the High Court for scrapping of the plaintiff's deposition in the Zia Orphanage case and requested the court to stop the case proceedings.

The judge then asked them to grill the plaintiff of the Zia Charitable Trust case, but they told the judge they were not prepared as some senior members of Khaleda's defence team were outside Dhaka.

At one point, the defence lawyers claimed that the judge became adamant and was in a hurry to continue proceedings. They also pressed him to defer the date of hearing, claiming that the judge had political bias.

But the judge ordered them to question ACC Director Harun-Ur-Rashid, the plaintiff and investigation officer of the two graft cases.

Khandker Mahbub Hossain, Khaleda's chief counsel, then started questioning him.

It was the first cross-examination of the plaintiff by the defence.

After partial questioning, the judge set the new date and asked the defence to appear before the court with full preparations for hearing.

On the defence plea for time, the judge said: “You have been asking for time for the last six months and I have been entertaining your appeal. Let's now start working instead of talking.”

The judge added, “I will not be able to say whether the cases are false or have been filed on political considerations until taking deposition of the persons involved in the cases.

 “Those words -- adamant and harsh -- that you have used against me have hurt me. You have also alleged that I am in a hurry. This too is not right…. A judge of a court never becomes adamant.”

About the allegation of political bias, he said, “I have been in the service for 32 years and I got the job on the basis of my merit, not because of political or government links.”

He said he joined this special court six months ago and took up the job of continuing the trial. During the time, while these cases have seen hardly any progress, he delivered judgment on about 100 cases.

“All the accused will be acquitted if the cases are found politically motivated and the charges are not proved. But why won't the trial process move on?” he said.

On the defence claim that it did not get all the documents needed for its preparations for argument, the judge said he arranged 1,200 certified copies of the case documents so that everyone on the defence side got those.