Richard Benkin's propaganda against Blitz editor

A former college professor and an employee with a private company in United States, Dr. Richard L Benkin has started making propaganda now in the world, including in his own website named www.interfaitstrength.com terming court dates of Weekly Blitz editor, Mr. Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury as 'bogus'.

Mr. Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury faces sedition, treason and blasphemy charges in Bangladesh since 2004 [he was arrested on November 29, 2003] for confronting militant Islam; for publishing investigative reports on breeding of Jihadist inside madrassas; for demanding relations between Bangladesh and Israel etc.

He fought single handedly against notorious Islamist militancy group Hizbut Tahir, which was finally banned in 2009. He also fought against anti-Semitic book named Dajjal published by Hizbut Towhid. Mr. Choudhury continued to write to expose nasty face of anti-Semitic Dr. Zakir Naik, till his entry to UK and Canada was denied.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury received FREEDOM TO WRITE AWARD from PEN USA in 2005; MORAL COURAGE AWARD from American Jewish Committee in 2006; MONACO MEDIA AWARD in 2007 and a number of local and international awards for his outstanding contributions in fighting militant Islam and anti-Semitism.

But, Richard Benkin is now visibly assigned to divert world attention from the case of Mr. Choudhury to other direction.

Richard Benkin writes: "The time has come to put a cap on this saga. More than six and a half years since his arrest, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury continues to publish his newspaper freely and openly. Government opposition and Islamist attacks have stopped."

He again wrote: "It looks like the Awami League government expects 2010 to be just like 2009. Shoaib was summoned to the courtroom on January 12, but the government's witness did not show. Did the court finally drop this case after the government again thumbed its nose at the rule of law? Of course they did not. They merely ignored the government's latest violation of law and set a new date of February 18, 2010. When will the Awami League realize that actions such as these only confirm to the rest of the civilized world that Bangladesh is not a nation where that supports the rule of law or a nation that wishes to join or partner with them."

Dr. Benkin wrote: "Since his 2005 release from prison, Shoaib has been forced to attend regular court appearances at the rate of approximately one every month. It has been an emotionally and financially draining experience. Most of those appearances have bee perfunctory--nothing really happens, but Shoaib is forced to wait at the courthouse the entire day. Periodically, the judge and prosecutor will attempt to circumvent Bangladeshi law by trying to re-incarcerate Shoaib or forcing a quick and pre-determined trial; even though his pending appeal before the Bangladeshi Supreme Court renders the latter illegal. There have been at least five attempts to revoke his bail and otherwise re-incarcerate him; and we were successful in preventing all of them. Fortunately, there are a number of Bangladeshi officials who are becoming more and more aware of the damage this admittedly false prosecution is doing to their nation."

It may be mentioned here that, Dr. Richard L Benkin was hired as a lobbyist by BNP-Jamaat led government as a lobbyist and subsequently he registered himself with US Justice Department declaring him as a lobbyist of this Islamist government.

Dr. Benkin got acquainted to members of US Congress and Senate as he was handling the case of Mr. Choudhury for years. He played the single-handed role in setting Choudhury free from prison in 2005 with the help of Congressman Mark Steven Kirk.

It may also be mentioned here that, Dr. Benkin's anger got exposed when Mr. Choudhury resigned from Forcefield, when Dr. Benkin refused to publish any statement on persecution of Bahais in Iran; persecution of Ahmadiyas in Pakistan and Bangladesh etc.

Now, the same Richard Benkin has started writing to people in USA and other countries, with the ulterior motive of turning their faces of attention from the trial of Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury.

Here is the full text of his statement with our comments in required areas:

"November 12, 2009. Shoaib called me with news about today's court proceedings. They could not have taken much more than ten minutes, he said. There were no witnesses, and the prosecution did not even participate really. Judge Bashir Ullah merely informed the defense that the case would be continued to an unspecified date the second week of January 2010.

"Throughout his recent US trip, Shoaib made it clear to all of us--supporters and well wishers both inside and outside of the US government--that he "had to get back to Dhaka" for his November 11 court appearance. Yet, the court evidently did not give the matter the same level of seriousness. While several previous court dates seemed to indicate that the government might be looking to end Shoaib's ordeal, we have returned to the "hurry up and wait" mode that has characterized most of Shoaib's 73 court appearances.

"As I have suggested as recently as last week, stringing out this onerous and admittedly false prosecution continues to punish Shoaib without forcing the government to do so on the basis of law of evidence. Nor does it risk angering Bangladeshi Islamists, who were the force behind this entire prosecution. The Bangladeshi government remains little more than their lackey.

"Once again, politics, appeasement, and cowardice trump justice for the government of Bangladesh. It is absolutely un-believable that some people actually thought the Awami League government would be different. They should have listened to our warnings.

"It looks like the Awami League government expects 2010 to be just like 2009. Shoaib was summoned to the courtroom on January 12, but the government's witness did not show. Did the court finally drop this case after the government again thumbed its nose at the rule of law? Of course they did not. They merely ignored the government's latest violation of law and set a new date of February 18, 2010. When will the Awami League realize that actions such as these only confirm to the rest of the civilized world that Bangladesh is not a nation where that supports the rule of law or a nation that wishes to join or partner with them.

"What a surprise, the witness did not show at the February, so the judge--who clearly knows more about politics than the law--just re-scheduled for March. Can we really call Bangladesh a nation of laws?

"So, Shoaib had to go to court, taking time money, and spending emotional capital in March--and April, and May, and June. And the witness failed to show in every instance, and the court simply continued the case each time instead of doing what any self-respecting jurist would do at this point and dismiss the charges. Getting Bangladesh to follow the rule of law will be our unwavering quest. Shoaib's next bogus court date is July 7, 2010.

"To the surprise of no one, the July court day provided a repeat of the same: no witness, not even the proscution, but the ever complian judge setting another court date in August.

"Since his 2005 release from prison, Shoaib has been forced to attend regular court appearances at the rate of approximately one every month. It has been an emotionally and financially draining experience. Most of those appearances have bee perfunctory--nothing really happens, but Shoaib is forced to wait at the courthouse the entire day. Periodically, the judge and prosecutor will attempt to circumvent Bangladeshi law by trying to re-incarcerate Shoaib or forcing a quick and pre-determined trial; even though his pending appeal before the Bangladeshi Supreme Court renders the latter illegal. There have been at least five attempts to revoke his bail and otherwise re-incarcerate him; and we were successful in preventing all of them. Fortunately, there are a number of Bangladeshi officials who are becoming more and more aware of the damage this admittedly false prosecution is doing to their nation.

"On August 6, 2008, Shoaib arrived at the courthouse expecting yet another perfunctory court date. Instead, he was told that his trial would commence that afternoon. At first, that gave us all cause for concern, but on closer examination it might have been a more hopeful sign. In the months leading up to this turn of events, Shoaib had been required to return to court at ever shrinking intervals; but was told to return in a month at the previous one. Moreover, within that period, one of his appeals was rejected (neither a surprise nor a devastating blow), another was first scheduled to be held then not, then to be scheduled again but only after being rejected by the lower court. As such, the status of the appeal on August 6 was not entirely clear; perhaps allowing this unexpected legal move by the government. Additionally, the regular prosecutor (who had become ever more positive toward Shoaib) was not in attendance. He was replaced by an "Additional Public Prosecutor" who was downright hostile. This individual is also a member of the BNP, the party that arrested and tortured Shoaib on charges it knew to be false. He shoed Shoaib from the courtroom and made him wait outside in the corridor for the several hours until the trial would begin. He did this even though there were no seats and Shoaib was running a fever. Shoaib phoned or texted me at least once an hour, and each succeeding text showed increasingly more worry, anger, and even despair. But he always maintained faith in his many supporters. I asked Shoaib if his attorney objected to the trial starting, based on Bangladeshi law, and Shoaib said he did but was overruled. In one text, Shoaib said that the court "seemed desperate to start the trial." Between Shoaib and his brother Sohail, I got a very nasty feeling all night (Chicago is eleven hours behind Dhaka) that the government was determined to get this matter over with and convict Shoaib of these charges. Having spoken with Shoaib for quite some time after the court appearance, I do not believe the situation is so clearly negative.

"The judge called the first witness (Officer in Charge at the time of his arrest, Abdul Hanif), about whom we had been hearing for the past four years as the prosecution's big gun. According to Shoaib, he testified to the usual falsehoods (named me as Shoaib's collaborator--not the first time). He then mentioned a non-existent article, "Hello Tel Aviv," which he and others allege that Shoaib wrote for USAToday. We have been hearing about it for years, and it is here when things got interesting. Hanif continued that Shoaib (in 2003) sent faxes and made calls to Israel; but no such communication between those two countries exists. He accused Shoaib of being anti-Islamic, of praising Jews and Christians (evidently a terrible offense), and calling Bangladesh "a breeding ground for jihadists." At that point, the judge turned to the witness and very pointedly asked him if he had any evidence for this. The officer responded that he conducted an investigation, but the judge would have none of it. That is not evidence, he said, it's "bulls**t," in Shoaib's words. No doubt, that's a rather loose translation, but Shoaib was attempting to convey something about the judge's attitude. The judge concluded with the witness by admonishing him that he was not interested in anything for which there was no concrete evidence.

"The judge then called Shoaib to the bench (something evidently as rarely done in Bangladeshi courts evidently as in our own). He asked him about the notorious "Hello Tel Aviv," and Shoaib said that no such article exists. The judge told him--in a voice that others could hear—that if the prosecution cannot produce the article that alone would cause him to dismiss the case. Shoaib also mentioned that the previously hostile prosecutor "fell silent" after he saw the judge's attitude.

The second day of the trial was rather brief and consisted of Shoaib's new co-counsel cross-examining the witness. The witness will offer his responses at the next court date, August 31.

"So a potentially disastrous event might turn out to be a good one. Now, to be sure, Shoaib is still quite anxious about this--and with good reason. As he said, this is the trial and we do not know for certain how it will end. By the same token, the events do seem to bear out our ongoing efforts and projections as Shoaib never received that level of judicial propriety under the previous government. We will know better as we move into the next round of court dates whether or not our optimism is justified.

"Good news? Bad news? Both, really. It's going to be a day-to-day matter, and we must stay on top of things even between court dates—something I am doing on a daily basis.

"On the second day of the trial, there was a frightening incident at Shoaib's residence, which I have been assured is being investigated. But it underscores Shoaib's courage in that even if the government obeys its own national laws, there remains danger from rogues and scoundrels at every turn. See Threats against Muslim Hero all too Common

"Shoaib returned to court on August 31 for the trial's third day. The government witness was to give his response to questions posed on cross examination. He did not show, and the prosecution filed a "time petition": more time for the witness to respond. We should hope after five years of supposedly having the answers, three weeks plus was enough time. I urged that defense to oppose the move, but I am not sure what happens. Also, it is possible that the government wants to bend over backwards to show that it is not pushing the acquittal but if it comes, acquittal will be the result of the Bangladeshi law. Still, more time seems highly improper given all the time that has passed already.

"The witness did show the next day, and the cross examination proceeded. The defense asked a number of questions that were designed to impeach the witnesses credibility. The questions focused on matters of fact that have been alleged, and the witness was unable to respond knowledgeably to any of them. On a matter critical to the prosecution's case, the defense asked the witness for examples of words by Shoaib that "hurt the image of Bangladesh," as he alleged in his previous testimony. He was unable to do so--which makes sense given the fact that Shoaib has not hurt the image of Bangladesh, that the nation's Army Chief and others have stated publicly that there is a problem in the country of radical Islamist terrorists, and that the witness has been sent to parrot a series of false and unsupportable charges against Shoaib.

"The trial has been going so well, and the judge has been quite professional throughout that Shoaib contacted me and expressed his happiness at the trial's impartiality thus far. His attorneys also feel confident that the case is going very well according to Bangladeshi law. In fact, as I told several key individuals in the US and Bangladesh; an acquittal a this point only vindicates the Bangladeshi judiciary and indicates that it will continue to handle these cases with impartiality and professionalism. It is also becoming clear that this government offers far more in the way of justice than either of its political predecessors, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party or the Awami League.

"Shoaib returned to court on October 5. His attorney (specifically S N Goswami, Secretary General of the Bangladesh Minority Lawyers Association), peppered prosecution witness and plaintiff, Abdul Hanif who was the officer in charge when Shoaib was arrested in 2003. For Shoaib, the most disturbing part of the proceedings when Hanif claimed that Israel was "an enemy state" of Bangladesh. He was concerned that Hanif's statement reflected the position of the government. At this point, we cannot confirm that, but it is something we are investigating.

"More importantly, the defense again showed that Hanif had not evidence for his allegations against Shoaib. He still has not produced the alleged "Hello Tel Aviv" article, something the judge said on the trial's first day would be sufficient to find for the defense. According to Shoaib, the judge was clearly impressed by Brother Goswami's effort, which also included his narrative of the brutal treatment Shoaib suffered in prison, including attempts on his life.

"Shoaib's next court date was October 30. Shoaib and his attorney arrived, but the government witness did not. The government's witness has failed to show for the trial repeatedly. In most societies, judicial standards would lead the court to order the prosecution to proceed without the absent witness; but not so in Bangladesh. The court simply continues the case without so much as an admonition or a directive to show at the appointed date or forfeit his testimony. To make matters worse, the case was continued to January 15, 2009!

"This is extremely disturbing for several reasons and places in doubt government assurances of its desire to end the matter during its term. It has scheduled elections for December, which means that it has no intention of bringing the issue to an end. Thus far, the judge also has made it clear that the government has not produced a scintilla of credible evidence. Yet, the case continues to drain Shoaib of financial, emotional, and personal resources. At what point does the process itself become persecution of a dissident?

"Perhaps we have reached that point, and I communicated my anger to the government of Bangladesh. I do not expect it to act on my anger but on the principles of good jurisprudence and human rights that demand fairness in this case. I also have contacted Professor Irwin Cotler to see if there are any judicial principles that legitimately challenges what the government is doing.

"Shoaib's first court appearance in 2009 was also his first appearance during the reign of the new Awami League government. Two things give us cause to be hopeful: the charges against Shoaib were brought by Awami's arch rival Bangladesh Nationalist Party; and the new government has promised that it will make a clean break from Bangladesh's recent past marred by corruption, Islamist sponsorship, and minority persecution. Our long experience with the government of Bangladesh has made us extremely cautious with any optimism. The January 15 court appearance confirmed the importance of that caution.

"First, the judge who had been presiding over the trial has been promoted. The new judge had no experience with this case and at least claimed that he knew nothing about. So he asked the Public Prosecutor to brief him about the case. The Public Prosecutor, of course, provided him with a biased view of the case to support his own efforts. He said it was "a very sensitive case" that inflames the "religious sentiments of the people of Bangladesh." He said that Shoaib's tried to visit the "forbidden State Israel." And no doubt, as he did, also threw in some choice comments about the current situation there. He told the judge that the crux of the case is that Shoaib has hurt the religious sentiments of Muslims with his writing, his support of Israel, and his criticism of madrassas. Odd though it seems no one had a problem believing that Shoaib's life should hang in the balance for that. The prosecutor gave the judge the original charge sheet, which is terribly flawed, inflammatory, and replete with outright falsehoods. And as he did, he made a point of telling the judge that it was produced after "extensive investigation." The judge did not give the defense an opportunity to provide any information on the case.

"All of this happened after the prosecutor announced that the witness (the state's only witness thus far) was not going to be available to testify that day. This is becoming numbingly familiar, and the witness's unavailability seems to come on the heels of effective questioning by defense counsel. But—unlike what we might expect in the court of any nation where justice and the rule of law prevail—the court did not even flinch, let alone safeguard the defendant's right to a speedy trial. (The charges against Shoaib were brought five years ago!)

"These events should make it clear to everyone that the previous "assurances" we were given than the case would run a speedy course and that the verdict will be based on the law and confirmed evidence are worthless. Clearly, the Bangladeshis are sending up a trial balloon that if allowed to fly will let them string us--and more importantly Shoaib--along indefinitely via this ruse. I think we've all seen sufficient evidence of dissembling and delaying tactics by the Bangladeshis to expect that our passivity in the face of this sort of thing will never bring Shoaib justice.

"We also see that there is no let-up in picturing Shoaib as an enemy of Islam. The judge was not shocked by the portrayal, nor did he ask for any clarification. He merely accepted the statement; just as he merely accepted the fact of the government witness not showing for court. At least the previous judge demanded evidence; so far, this one is not so discerning.

"The court is allowing the government to proceed even though its (tainted) witness does not show up on scheduled court days. I doubt it would be so generous if Shoaib did not show.

"Shoaib's next court date is a month from now, February 18. As we can see, the court is all too happy to prolong Shoaib's harassment and drain his emotional and financial resources. Will the witness be a no-show again and get another pass or try to push through the same faked testimony, devoid of evidence? Will this judge demand a measure of legal principle if he does testify? Will it be clear again that they intend to keep this Sword of Damocles over Shoaib's head indefinitely? Clearly, they need to know that this sort of activity brings dishonor to their country and, I expect, some pretty nasty consequences.

Shoaib was back in court on February 18. Was what transpired new and promising or more of the same? Well, both. The new presiding judge, Mohammed Boshir Ullah asked the Public Prosecutor why the case was brought in the first place. Before he could answer, however, one of Shoaib's longtime attorneys, Advocate Govinda Chandra Promanik, answered that the former BNP government brought the charge because Shoaib forecasted the rise of Islamist radicals in Bangladesh. "My client is a well known journalist in Bangladesh defending human rights and rights of religious minorities as well as promoting culture of peace," he added.

"The judge responded that Shoaib should be "rewarded" and not "harassed" for exposing the radicals.

"Great, huh? But immediately after that, he set March 31 as the next court date "to hear witnesses"; that is, to maintain the status quo and the charges against Shoaib Choudhury. Does that sound like a reward? It is possible that the judge's words signal a new attitude on the part of the recently elected Awami League government, but his actions indicate just the opposite. Are we to conclude that Awami is no different than the caretaker/military or the BNP? In the same vein, the government is still refusing to issue a visa allowing me into the country so I can see Shoaib and advocate for him. That makes four times out of my last five attempts, if anyone's counting.

"What are we to make of these confusing signals? Pretty much what we have concluded before: that the only measure of the Bangladeshis' sincerity is ACTION; and they have taken some positive action in this case over the past several years, just not enough for us to consider Bangladesh a nation of laws.

"The government witness did not show--again--at the March court date, and the government merely set a new date, May 26. The court made no mention of the witness's and prosecution's disregard for the court's authority by his time after time thumbing his nose at the court and just not showing up. Imagine if Shoaib acted that way even once! It does not look as if the Bangladeshis, and specifically the so-called democratic Awami League government--wants to do anything until they size up the ease with which the current administration will allow them to get what they want without taking any action on their human rights problems, such as Shoaib's case.

"The May 26 court appearance only confirmed the growing realization that the Bangladeshis have no intention of ending Shoaib's persecution until they realize that their commitment to injustice hurts their people more than their attempt to appease Islamists (who brought the false case) helps them. They are violating their moral and constitutional duty to place the needs of their people first. "Today nothing significant happened. Only I was standing in the court for hours, witness did not come and the judge gave another new date," Shoaib told me shortly after leaving the courtroom. Nations committed to the rule of law guarantee their citizens rights to a speedy trial and to confront their accusers; but Bangladesh is evidently not a nation of laws. For in civilized countries, when the prosecution's only witness refuses to show up to testify--again and again and again--courts understand that the prosecution has no case and dismiss it. But evidently, Bangladesh is not a civilized country. The United States and other countries must realize that Bangladesh is not their ally; is not a country committed to freedom; is a nation so morally bankrupt and aware that it supports injustice and radicalism, that it is not worthy of aid or trade. Its treatment of this one man is a crime unto itself; but it is even more damning for what it reveals. For if Bangladesh can do this to Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, it can do the same to any citizen; it can justify its consistent failure to stop its slaughter of Hindus and other minorities; especially if the world does not make it take responsibility for its morally bereft actions; and the time for that is arriving: perhaps a suit in the International Criminal Court in The Hague; perhaps in a consistent effort to convince large American importers to cut back even further on their imports from Bangladesh; perhaps by bringing actions that will disqualify Bangladesh from participating in UN peacekeeping missions (the real cause of the 2007 military coup). Regardless of which action or actions we take, the time for inaction has drawn to a close.

"Shoaib was ordered to return to court again on June 17; and not surprisingly, there was nothing different about this ridiculous government demand than all the others: he was forced to wait for hours to be called into court and told the government witness did not show, that the case was continued until July 15. By now, even the dullest wit in South Asia would realized that this witness will never show unless they are able to fabricate some false evidence against Shoaib. Thus, the government's continuances only confirm the conviction by many that the Bangladeshis have made "the process the punishment" and that the Awami League is no different than the BNP or military rulers. It might be worse because it pretends to offer something different, which resulted in some westerners and pro-minority advocates waiting for it to act. Now, it is clear that they will do nothing to erase corruption, suppression of dissidents, and oppression of minorities in Bangladesh.

"Shoaib's July 15 court appearance was surprisingly different from what we have experienced for months. With no warning to the defense, the government called three new witnesses. (Their only previous witness remained AWOL). Each testified briefly. The former Assistant Commissioner of Bangladesh's Special Branch said Shoaib committed a crime by trying to go to Israel. He also said he committed the crime of hurting the "religious sentiments of Muslims by praising Christians and Jews." A non-governmental computer technician testified that the government seized Shoaib's computers but did not say what was found on it. He also got into a protracted discussion with Shoaib's attorney about whether the items seized were computers, printers, or other peripherals. The Inspector of Police also accused Shoaib of breaking the law by trying to go to Israel. Shoaib's attorney did get him to admit that Shoaib had no airplane ticket to Israel, however, alleging he was going to Bangkok and Singapore then on to Tel Aviv; an odd route even under Dhaka's travel ban.

"The point is that none of this is new or even compelling. If this is all the government can regurgitate after five and a half years, there cannot be much of a case, at least on the basis of Bangladeshi law. Even the judge seemed to agree, asking the defense to explain exactly what Shoaib is accused of doing, after the day's lame testimony. (The government seems to have finally given up on the false and easily-disproved allegation of a "Hello Tel Aviv" article since the judge asked for evidence of the allegation.) When Advocate Govinda said that Shoaib's crime was exposing the rise of radical Islam and its use of madrassas, Judge Bashir Ullah--and this might sound familiar--said he should be rewarded for that and not condemned. Shoaib said the Public Prosecutor was smiling at that point.

"Whether he was smiling because he knows a guilty verdict will be handed down regardless, because he knows our expectations of vindication will be dashed as were our previous hopes, or because he sees an end to Shoaib's ordeal crowned with a not guilty verdict; is a matter of speculation. We seem to have gone through this before under previous governments only to be disappointed. But Shoaib believes that the government has decided to finish the trial, he expects as early as August. They could have done so months, even years ago but did not. Perhaps the economic hard times have led them to re-cast their strategy as regards trade. Perhaps they have read recent articles urging the United Nations to bar Bangladesh from peacekeeping missions. Bangladesh provides more UN peacekeepers than any other country except Pakistan, and doing so has become critical for the Bangladeshi economy. It was also one of the underlying reasons for the 2007 coup there. Or maybe it is they, not us, who ultimately tired of it all.

"If Shoaib is right, here is what we can expect. Once the government concludes its case, the court will set a date for "argument," or the defense's rebuttal. Once that is concluded, the judge will retire to determine verdicts and set a date when judgement will be read. Today's events certainly made it seem that the government had despaired of presenting any serious evidence for the charge; a hopeful sign. We must remember, however, that if the real decision is to continuing placating the radicals, the lack of evidence will not factor into Shoaib's fate. It certainly has not up till now.

"Next date: July 22, 2009.

"On July 22, the trial picked up where it left off last week. The prosecution called four witnesses to testify, but none of them had anything significant to say. Shoaib did not even find anything that qualified them to testify. They testified that Shoaib "wanted" to travel to Israel and that he communicated with Israelis over the Internet. Are these crimes in Bangladesh? Let's hope not! It would indicate that there is no commitment to basic freedoms in Bangladesh; if that is the case, I am sure the US and the UN would have specific actions that they would feel compelled to take. Shoaib also noted that one of the witnesses said that he hurt the sentiments of Muslims by "criticizing madrassas"--another troubling attack on freedom of expression. And the police officer that testified said that Shoaib was carrying "banned books" when arrested in 2003. (Banned books!) But when his attorney asked, "Did you read these books and are you sure that these are banned," he said, "No I did not read them nor did see any ban order." Incredulous, his attorney then asked, "How do you know that these were banned books?" The witness replied, "I was told by someone."

"This is a pretty anemic case, especially when we consider that the government has had five and a half years to prepare it. It is spending an inordinate amount of time, exclusively mind you, to focus on one thing: Shoaib's alleged attempt to travel to Israel. Shoaib has paid for that "crime" a thousand fold. The government seems to have given up trying to prove the other phantom allegations, so the only question is whether or not the judge will determine that the specific action rises to the level of sedition, treason, and blasphemy. If he does, there can be no question that justice does not exist in Bangladesh, and I would urge the legal community in countries that abide by the rule of law to take action. Further, witness testimony at the prosecution's behest yesterday certainly indicates that some in the Bangladeshi government do not believe in basic freedoms of speech and expression. Next court date: July 29th. Clearly, things are speeding toward an end--hopefully a good one.

"I spoke with Shoaib as he was returning home from the court today. He was in court--but the prosecution was not! A frustrated judge said, "I don't want anymore harassment of Choudhury!" And then set another court date: August 12.

"Shoaib's court appearance on August 12 was rather odd. Two witnesses appeared for the government. According to Shoaib, their testimony (such as it was) was essentially dictated by the government perhaps in the form of extremely leading questioning and canned answers. Moreover, Shoaib said, the "prosecution side did not properly allow my lawyers to cross examine these fake witnesses." It all seemed rather irregular, and we still have to be given the next court date.

"What does it all mean? Well, the first thing it means is that we were wrong recently and at other times to believe the Bangladeshi government had any sort of coherent plan or even the vaguest idea of what to do about this man. Shoaib Choudhury will remain a mystery to them because he has consistently stood on principle despite "incentives" not to do so.

"Contrast that with the government. First, they claimed interest in his work--then, they arrested him. First they refused to charge him--then they charged him with capital offenses. Then, they refused to let him out on bail; but then let him out. They said they would drop the charges--which they admitted were false--then, they said they would not and called demands to do so interference. So they told us they would not put him on trial--but eventually did. Don't worry, they said, there is no evidence and he will be acquitted. But as perfunctory court dates came and went, the government refused to call any witnesses or present any arguments but somehow kept getting new court dates.

"These things happened consistently with four different governments in charge (BNP, civilian caretaker, military-backed caretaker, and now Awami League). And with every turn away from justice, one could see the hand of Islamist puppet masters pulling the government's strings--over and over again. The government changed again and finally called a witness--but when the defense challenged him to provide evidence to support his allegations (and the judge supported the defense), we had months in which the witness simply refused to show for court--but the government got more court dates without any reprimand or demand to produce their witness. Recently, the prosecution changed up again and started calling witnesses; and Shoaib's attorney was convinced that the government was looking to end their ordeal. The witnesses talked about all sorts of things but did not offer any evidence that Shoaib committed a crime. But the last court date was another one in which the government failed to show. Then, there was today's debacle with government witnesses that seemed to be pertinent to another case--any case, but certainly not Shoaib's. They offered nothing of substance to move the case along. The judge previously castigated the government saying that for exposing Islamist radicals, Shoaib Choudhury deserves a medal--and then he allows this clown show to proceed in his court. So, is the government slowing down again or does it have an idea of when it will conclude. God alone knows! But even we humans know that for as long as they continue this travesty of justice, the government of Bangladesh is insuring that the United States and others will continue to reject their pleas for tariff relief, and their people will suffer as a result of their actions.

"Shoaib's next court appearance is August 27, 2009. It will be the 66th appearance since his arrest in November 2003.

"August 27, 2009. While it seemed at one point that the government had decided to bring Shoaib Choudhury's (and their own) ordeal to an end; the last few court appearances tell us otherwise. Most recently, Shoaib was rather matter-of-fact in conveying the news of his latest court appearance. "One witness appeared; nothing significant; next trial date September 15th." As a legal scholar recently told me, the Bangladeshi government "is denying Shoaib due process and delberately his right to a speedy trial."

"Shoaib called me with news about today's court proceedings (September 15, 2009). It was "deja vu all over again": he went there, but the prosecution did not show. Naturally, the judge did not penalize the government but just said he would set a new date for the trial to resume. In the meantime, though, Shoaib's attorney, Advocate Govinda Chanda Pramanik told the court that Shoaib will be visiting the United States from October 26 through November 5. The court gave its consent. Shoaib will be in New York and New Haven from October 26 through October 30; at Rutgers University in New Jersey on November 1; and in Washington with me from November 2 through November 4.

"Once again, politics, appeasement, and cowardice trump justice for the government of Bangladesh. It is absolutely unbelieveable that some people actually thought the Awami League government would be different. They should have listened to our warnings.

"The time has come to put a cap on this saga. More than six and a half years since his arrest, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury continues to publish his newspaper freely and openly. Government opposition and Islamist attacks have stopped. While the government has not dropped the charges against him, they stopped their active prosecution of the case--a process that began in January 2009 at the height of the Israel-Gaza War and which was heading toward a conclusion that certainly would have convicted Shoaib. His periodic calls to come to court at this point are perfunctory, which is where the Bangladeshi government seems content to leave things. What happens next is an internal matter between the legal authorities in Bangladesh and Shoaib Choudhury."

Wao! Dr. Richard Benkin! Are you trying to dictate the US Congress, European Parliament, British House of Commons, Canadian Parliament etc., on Mr. Choudhury's case and trial? Are you trying to say that, those resolutions passed by US Congress, European Parliament etc comes to an end, though all of them demanded dropping of this false charge?

Now, who has hired you, Dr. Benkin to start campaign against Mr. Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury? Iranians? Or Bangladeshi Islamists? We have evidence that, you have already contacted Bangladeshi contacts of Harkatul Jihad and trying to give them instigations in causing harm to Mr. Choudhury.

Contents taken from www.interfaithstrength.com a blog owned by Dr. Richard L Benkin.

Related Topics: International News receive the latest by email: subscribe to weekly blitz's free mailing list

Richard Benkin's propaganda against Blitz editor

Reader comments on this item

Comment on this item