Joy, Palak Seek Discharge from Crimes Against Humanity Case

An application has been filed seeking the discharge of Sajeeb Wazed Joy and former State Minister for Information and Communication Technology Junaid Ahmed Palak from a crimes against humanity case linked to the July mass uprising.

The petition was submitted on Thursday before the three-member International Crimes Tribunal-1, headed by Justice Md Golam Mortuza Mozumder.

The tribunal has scheduled January 21 for passing an order on whether formal charges will be framed in the case. Joy is currently absconding, while Palak remains in jail and was produced before the tribunal on Thursday.

Arguing for Joy, state-appointed defense lawyer Manzur Alam stated that the prosecution failed to properly present Joy’s address and identity in the formal charge. He argued that Joy served as an unpaid ICT adviser to the prime minister, not as part of any ministry, and had no involvement in the daily operations of the ICT Ministry.

The lawyer further said Joy was not a decision-maker and had no authority to issue directives, as policy decisions were the responsibility of the government.

Addressing allegations related to social media posts made by Palak during the July uprising, the defense argued that there was no evidence those posts were made with Joy’s knowledge or instruction. Palak did not tag Joy in the posts, nor did Joy like or comment on them, the lawyer added.

The defense also claimed there was no proof of any communication between Joy and Salman F Rahman, despite allegations that Palak had contact with Rahman. According to the lawyer, the prosecution failed to establish any link showing actions were taken on Joy’s instructions.

The tribunal was told that Joy made no public statements until August 5, 2024, and was not in the country at the time of the alleged incidents. The prosecution, the defense argued, did not specify when Joy left the country.

Claiming the charges against Joy lacked legal grounds, the lawyer alleged that individuals who should have been accused were instead made prosecution witnesses. He further said the case was politically motivated to obstruct Joy’s return to the country.

Seeking discharge for Palak, his lawyer Liton Ahmed told the tribunal that his client is facing 97 cases and had spent 89 days on remand. He alleged that even during attempts at privileged communication, Palak was compelled to participate in virtual proceedings.

The defense stated that internet restrictions during the July uprising were imposed to prevent the spread of rumors. The lawyer also argued that Palak’s statements had been selectively presented and that his full remarks would convey a different meaning.

According to the defense, Palak attempted to maintain public order and did not act to suppress the movement.