The state-appointed defence lawyer for absconding deposed prime minister Sheikh Hasina and former home minister Asaduzzaman Khan on Tuesday told the International Crimes Tribunal-1 that the prosecution had failed to prove any superior command responsibilities under the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 against his clients and urged the tribunal to reject the prosecution鈥檚 plea for maximum punishment for the duo.
Arguing for his clients for the second day in the crimes against humanity case against his clients and detained former inspector general of police Chowdhury Abdullah Al Mamun for their alleged command responsibility in committing atrocities during the July uprising in 2024, the defence counsel, Amir Hossain, further said that his clients neither issued any order nor held superior command responsibility for the atrocities.
Hasina and Asaduzzaman are being tried in absentia.
Mamun, who has turned a state witness, was in the dock.
Amir argued that Hasina did not order the use of lethal force against protesters and could not be held responsible for the killings.
He submitted that the charges brought under the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973 could not be applied against his clients.
He added that the prosecution had failed to present any evidence linking Hasina or Asaduzzaman to the alleged crimes and that the prosecution鈥檚 demand for the highest punishment for his clients was baseless.
The tribunal observed that evidence suggested Hasina and Asaduzzaman had witnessed the killings but took no action to stop them.
The judges noted that the accused failed to prevent the crimes despite being informed about the deaths.
Amir mentioned that the prosecution could not prove that the alleged offences were targeted, widespread, or systematic, and argued that Hasina committed no crime by ordering action to control the July 2024 protests since she never instructed anyone to kill protesters.
No witness had testified that Hasina or Asaduzzaman were personally present during the attacks and killed any of the victims in the shooting, he submitted.
Referring to the attack on July movement victims and National Citizen Party members during the National July Charter 2025 signing programme on October 17, Amir questioned whether any members of the law enforcement agencies had been tried for that incident.
The tribunal then observed that differences of opinion could never justify torture or killings.
When the judges asked whether shooting and burning six people amounted to crimes against humanity, Amir replied that the prosecution had failed to produce any evidence directly linking Hasina to the killings.
The judges, however, noted that Hasina had instigated and ordered violence to stop the student-people鈥檚 march toward Dhaka, citing an audio conversation between her and Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal president Hasanul Haq Inu, who had praised her actions.
Amir countered that if Hasina had truly ordered helicopter or drone attacks, thousands would have been killed.
He demanded that the seized bullets and Hasina鈥檚 call records should be tested by a neutral forensic department other than the state institutions.
The tribunal referred to the BBC and Al Jazeera documentaries, along with the UN human rights report on the July鈥揂ugust protests.
Amir said that the audio clip allegedly containing Hasina鈥檚 order to use lethal force was not beyond a reasonable doubt.
He also said that the prosecution had exaggerated the number of casualties, claiming over 3 lakh rounds of bullets were fired across the country and 95,000 of them in Dhaka.
Referring to an audio conversation in which Hasina reportedly said that July movement coordinator Abu Sayeed died from a head injury rather than gunfire, the judges cited medical testimony indicating government pressure to alter Sayeed鈥檚 postmortem report.
Amir dismissed the claim as a fabricated prosecution report.
The tribunal observed that Hasina鈥檚 comments indicated she had been monitoring the movement and asked whether Hasina, Asaduzzaman, or IGP had taken any action following Sayeed鈥檚 death.
The tribunal adjourned the hearing until Wednesday morning.
Amir said he would review the prosecution鈥檚 evidence on Wednesday.