DHAKA: The International Crimes Tribunal (ICT)-2 Thursday fixed March 31 for next hearing over a contempt rule against British journalist David Bergman for his derogatory remarks on the ICT in his blog.                    

The three-member tribunal led by Justice Obaidul Hasan passed the order after a plea of the prosecution.           

On February 20, the tribunal asked David Bergman to be present at the court within March 6 and explain his position by himself or through his lawyer.

Bergman’s lawyer Advocate Mostafizur Rahman pleaded for two weeks time. Following this, the tribunal set the date of hearing on March 18.

David Bergman, a special correspondent of country’s English daily New Age, is also son-in-law of Dr. Kamal Hossain.

Earlier, High Court lawyer Advocate Abul Kalam Azad filed a contempt of court allegation against journalist David Bergman for his derogatory comments on the International Criminal Tribunal-2 in his blog.   
   
He also sought a directive as to why a show cause notice should not be issued against Bergman for his remarks about the trial procedure and verdict of ICT in the blog.

Sources in the tribunal said Bergman had been warned once before by the tribunal.  

Regarding framing crimes against humanity charges against Delwar Hossain Sayedee by the tribunal on October 2, 2011, ‘The New Age’ published Bergman’s write-up titled ‘A crucial period for ICT’ in its editorial page.

The tribunal had issued a show cause notice against reporter David Bergman, The New Age editor Nurul Kabir and publisher ASM Shahidullah Khan for contempt of court.

After a hearing, on February 19, 2012, the tribunal issued a warning to David Bergman.

At that time, the tribunal upheld the contempt of court charge but the accused were let off with a warning.

Deputy Registrar of the International Criminal Tribunal, Arunabha Chakraborty, confirmed the new move by High Court lawyer Abul Kalam Azad to prosecute Bergman.

According to the new plea, journalist Bergman, on his own website (bangladeshwarcrimes.blogspot.com), released several controversial articles like ‘Azad Judgment analysis -1: In absentia trial & Defense inadequacy’ and ‘Azad Judgment analysis -II: Tribunal’s assumption’.

BDST: 1921 HRS, MAR 27, 2014