The assassin among us

Nur Chowdhury faces execution for killing Bangladesh’s president. That’s why he’s safe in Canada.

The assassin  among us

Douglas Miller/Keystone/Getty Images

On a muggy Friday in August 1975, as pre-dawn prayers rang out from city mosques, five trucks sped through the still-dark streets of Dhaka on a mission to change history. Each carried a platoon of soldiers toward the lakeside home of Bangladesh’s president, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the man who had led the country four years earlier in its bloody secession from Pakistan. The troops may not have been clear on their purpose, but their commanders were. Shortly after 5:15 a.m., a handful of soldiers, led by two officers armed with Sten submachine guns, burst through the gates of Mujib’s compound, shot two guards stationed on the ground floor, and set about searching for the president himself.

At the head of the team were army major Mohiuddin Ahmad and a 24-year-old former major named Nur Chowdhury—part of a cadre of junior officers who had conspired to assassinate Mujib and install a military-backed leader in his place. Chowdhury, who had recently left the military, had joined the plot only two days before the assault on Mujib’s house. But he would prove pivotal in the events that followed: when the president unexpectedly appeared at the top of a staircase, clad in his white kurta with his pipe in his hand, Mohiuddin, according to numerous witness accounts, lost his nerve.
“Sir,” he croaked in Bengali, “please come.”

“What do you want?” Mujib replied derisively. “Have you come to kill me? The Pakistani army couldn’t do it. Who are you that you think you can?”

Mohiuddin repeated his plea several times before Chowdhury arrived at the landing, according to conspirators who later spoke to Western journalists. Rankled by the delay, Chowdhury brushed Mohiuddin aside and unleashed a burst of fire from his Sten gun. The bullets entered the right side of Mujib’s torso, spinning him round and sending him headlong down the stairs, his pipe still clutched in his hand. Thus began an all-out massacre that in Bangladesh remains a day of infamy: going from room to room, the assassins slaughtered seven other members of Mujib’s extended family, from his eldest son Kamal to two of his newlywed daughters-in-law. When Mujib’s wife, Fazilatunnesa, appeared at the top of the stairs, they shot her, too. After finding Mujib’s youngest son, 10-year-old Russell, hiding behind a chair, they hauled him to an outdoor guard shack and dispatched him with a bullet.

Two other armed groups were simultaneously attacking residences belonging to Mujib’s brother-in-law and nephew, and by the start of the workday, some 21 of Mujib’s relatives and employees were dead. The conspirators later admitted they feared the Bangladeshi public would rally around any family members left alive, and they were right to worry. The coup was successful but short-lived, and the country was thrown into a cycle of coups and assassinations before anything resembling democracy emerged. In the mid-1980s, one of two Mujib daughters who were in Germany at the time of the massacre would return to Bangladesh to assume her father’s political legacy. Sheikh Hasina Rahman won an election in 1996 and became prime minister, an office she holds today. One of her first orders of business was to track down the killers and bring them to trial. In January 2010, after 13 years of trials and appeals, and some 3½ decades after the bloody morning in Dhaka, the first five went to the gallows.

But not Chowdhury. The man who by every reliable account pulled the trigger on the father of the nation of Bangladesh lives peacefully these days in a third-floor condominium in Etobicoke, Ont., where neighbours describe him as a cordial, well-dressed man—happy to trade pleasantries, disinclined to chat. The 61-year-old father of two is often in the company of his wife, Rashida Khanam. In the spring, he likes to plant flowers along the rail of the couple’s south-facing balcony.

Each week Chowdhury pays a visit to immigration authorities in north Toronto, because he is technically under a deportation order, and must keep the government apprised of his whereabouts. “Technically” is the operative word. Canada doesn’t deport people to face execution. Or, more accurately, our Supreme Court doesn’t let us. It is a principle born of our aspiration to set a humanitarian example for the rest of mankind. But what happens when our aspirations frustrate justice in other parts of the world? This week, Bangladesh’s foreign minister, Dipu Moni, is scheduled to visit Ottawa, where she is expected to raise the Chowdhury case, arguing that Canada’s qualms about the death penalty means a far greater crime will go unpunished. Chowdhury, she might well point out, is the latest in a series of suspected assassins, war criminals and human rights violators to find shelter in this country, to the growing dismay of critics here and abroad.

The assassin  among us

Rafiquar Rahman/Reuters

Sheikh Hasina herself declined to comment for this story. But in an interview with Maclean’s last March, she encapsulated the conundrum Chowdhury represents: “Canada is always a strong advocate for human rights,” she said. “But these killers, they have violated human rights. They are killers of women, children, so why should [Canada] keep him? Why should you keep any assassin? I don’t understand.”
The woman at the door looks scared. No, Nur Chowdhury doesn’t live here, she says through the chain. No, she doesn’t know where he is, and no, she is not his wife. Is she subletting the condo from him? A couple of seconds tick by. “Yes.” Does she have a phone number for him? “No,” she says, and with that, the door clicks shut.

If the Chowdhurys’ plan is to keep their whereabouts secret, they’ve got some work to do. The buzzer list in the condominium lobby bears Nur Chowdhury’s name, and it rings through to the same voice mail as Khanam’s listed phone number (the voice on the message is a man’s). The property is registered to both Khanam and Chowdhury—they bought it in 2005 for $185,000—and a neighbour across the hall says there is a couple living in the suite whose descriptions answer those of Khanam and Chowdhury. “They seem nice enough,” shrugs Cornel Nichifor, a construction worker. “The man’s maybe in his early 60s, South Asian, glasses. Last time I saw him was maybe a month ago.”

Chowdhury did not respond to repeated requests for an interview, and a message to his lawyer went unanswered. While he did not attend his trial in Bangladesh, he has maintained his innocence in Canadian court proceedings, saying he was not in the Mujib household at the time of the shootings.
His circumstances aren’t posh, but by Bangladeshi standards, he hasn’t suffered. In an inflammatory move following the 1975 coup, the new government of Khandaker Moshtaque passed a bill indemnifying him and the other killers and, to keep them out of the reach of their political enemies, awarded them diplomatic postings. Chowdhury held senior jobs in several countries, including Brazil and Iran, through Bangladesh’s years under military rule. When

Sheikh Hasina came to power, he was the country’s consul general in Hong Kong.
This favourable treatment reflected the conspirators’ view that they had done their country a favour. By 1975, Mujib’s political honeymoon had long ended, and Bangladesh was in the grip of a devastating famine. Mujib had responded to growing political unrest by using his massive parliamentary majority to ban opposition parties and declare himself “president for life.” “He needlessly enslaved a nation which had willingly made him its father,” lieutenant colonel Farook Rahman, one of the coup leaders, told the Sunday Times of London a year after the massacre. “I engineered the coup to put the brakes on my country’s headlong descent into hell.”

But Bangladesh descended into hell anyway, undergoing two more coups, followed by the military rule of general Ziaur Rahman, who was himself assassinated in 1981. The trauma of August 1975, meanwhile, never faded. Mujib’s descendents—both biological and political—clung to the hope they would one day see the killers brought to justice, and the return of Sheikh Hasina in the mid-1980s gave them their chance. In 1996, she led her father’s old party, the Awami League, to an election win, and called 15 conspirators home from their diplomatic posts to face conspiracy and murder charges. Five had remained in Bangladesh or were extradited from other countries, while one had died of natural causes in Zimbabwe. The rest scattered to the winds.
A series of trials went ahead anyway, and in April 2001, 12 of the 15 were convicted and sentenced to death—five of them, including Chowdhury, in absentia. Over the next nine years, their joint appeal worked its way to the country’s highest court, and on Jan. 27, 2010, the hangman at Dhaka Central Jail went to work. Farook and Rashid Khan, the main organizers of the coup, were among those executed. So too was Mohiuddin, the man who couldn’t bring himself to pull the trigger on his president.

The assassin  among us

South China Morning Post

Are the condemned men victims of a political vendetta? Amnesty International didn’t think so. Despite Bangladesh’s reputation for lawlessness and corruption, the human rights organization declared the trials to be fair and unbiased. Amnesty noted the presence of court-appointed lawyers for those tried in absentia (though, on principle, it opposes the death penalty). And while the Economist‘s local correspondent said the proceedings reflected a country “mired in dynastic rivalry,” the Mujib family has scrupulously avoided anything that might be construed as interference in the criminal proceedings. “The only thing my family is interested in is justice,” says Sajeeb Wazed, the prime minister’s 39-year-old son, and the most active Mujib descendent in the hunt for the killers. “I want to see Nur Chowdhury go back to Bangladesh and face the punishment that the Supreme Court of Bangladesh has upheld for him.”

From the outset, however, that punishment posed problems. Ten months before Mujib’s assassins were convicted in 2001, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Ottawa cannot allow fugitives to be extradited without first obtaining assurances they will not be executed. Such punishment, the court concluded, would “shock the conscience” of Canadians and is tolerable only under “exceptional circumstances”—though the court didn’t define what those circumstances are. One year later, it went a step further, blocking the government from deporting people who have been found inadmissible to Canada, yet who may face “conscience-shocking” treatment if removed. In that case, which involved the accused Tamil terrorist supporter Manickavasagam Suresh, the treatment was torture. But the ruling is widely understood to encompass capital punishment, too.

Taken together, these decisions amount to a life preserver for Chowdhury, who had turned up in Buffalo, N.Y., in the summer of 1996, entered Canada as a visitor, and promptly made a bid for asylum. To put it mildly, he met skepticism. In a scathing rejection issued in 2002, the Immigration and Refugee Board declared the 1975 massacre to be “more than a political assassination,” but rather, “a carefully laid plan to eliminate a whole family.” The panel brushed aside Chowdhury’s alibi—namely, that he was at his future wife’s house on the night of the coup, helping complete a rush order of T-shirts to be worn at a pro-Mujib rally the next day. Chowdhury had every opportunity to advance his alibi at his trial, the board said, and numerous witnesses placed him at the centre of the assault on Mujib’s house.

Chowdhury fought the decision unsuccessfully in Federal Court, and three years later, the government obtained a court order to have him removed. But they might have saved the paper. According to sources familiar with the case, Canadian officials have since advised their Bangladeshi counterparts that Ottawa cannot deport Chowdhury so long as the death sentence hangs over him. “If Bangladesh wants this man back,” says Maria Minna, a Liberal MP and member of a Bangladesh-Canada parliamentary friendship group, “it’s incumbent on them to negotiate with our government an agreement that he will not be put to death” (spokespeople with the Department of Foreign Affairs declined to comment).

Trouble is, say senior officials at Bangladesh’s High Commission in Ottawa, Chowd­hury has already been sentenced, and Dhaka can no more undo the decisions of its high court than Canada can its own. While Bangladeshi law does allow condemned prisoners to petition the court to have their case reviewed, or to seek clemency from the country’s president, such requests are rarely granted. And any climbdown could present problems for Sheikh Hasina, who was the target of a grenade attack in 2004 and is loath to look weak to her enemies. “Politically,” says one senior consular official, “it is impossible.”

So is Canadian high-mindedness standing in the way of justice abroad? Certainly, a growing list of wanted men have found shelter here. Joining Suresh and Chowdhury are at least three who face deportation under national security certificates due to alleged terror links; all are now out on bail as the government reviews its security certificate process, knowing the threat of torture or death in the men’s home countries would almost certainly block it from removing them. Canada has also been the chosen destination of Chinese fugitives like Lai Chang-xing, wanted on embezzlement charges yet still in Canada because of concerns he would be executed back in China. At least three others wanted by Beijing on financial charges remain in this country under similar circumstances.

The assassin  among us

Munir Uz Zaman/AFP/Getty Images;

Such cases make Canada look like a “patsy,” says former CSIS boss Reid Morden, and are precisely what critics foretold when the courts were grappling with the issue. “Every instance should be judged on its own merits, but that shouldn’t be a blank cheque to shield people due process in other countries,” says Morden, who as a junior diplomat in Pakistan during the 1970s had a front-row view of the turmoil in Bangladesh. “Not all other judicial systems are substandard to ours.”

Still, say civil liberties advocates, Canada’s position reflects its long-standing ideal that the world would be a better place without capital punishment, and is a key step in its abolition. “The international community, the UN Human Rights Committee, they’ve all taken a stand saying this is something they want to move away from,” says Sukanya Pillay, national security director for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. “You can’t fight lawlessness with lawlessness.”

The compromise, says Kent Roach, a constitutional law expert at the University of Toronto, may lie in those as yet undefined “exceptional circumstances” the court spoke of in the Suresh case. The government could conceivably argue that cases like Chowdhury are different because Dhaka’s hands are legally tied—that Chowdhury will otherwise never answer for his crimes. “I could imagine the courts saying this is an exceptional circumstance because there’s no practical alternative to the death penalty,” says Roach. “When the requesting country is unable to give assurances the death penalty will not apply, you have this stark choice.”

Ottawa would certainly have a hard time proving that Chowdhury represents an imminent threat to Canadians, as Sheikh Hasina suggested last year (“For the safety and security of the citizens of Canada, they should send him back,” she said). Since he arrived in Ontario, he’s steered clear of trouble and, indeed, other Bangladeshis. Few in Toronto’s mostly pro-Awami Bangladeshi community have laid eyes on him, and Monir Hossain, head of the National Bangladesh Canadian Council, says he does not attend the community’s annual Victory Day festivities on Dec. 16.

Hossain, who lives in Montreal, has heard reports of Chowdhury visiting a former Bangladeshi army captain in that city named Kismat Hashem—one of the men acquitted in the coup trial. Beyond that, his life is a question mark. His daughter Anab, 40, and his son Shahriyar, 37, live in the U.S. But because he has surrendered his passport to Canadian authorities, his ability to visit them is limited. Cornel Nichifor, the man living across the hall, says Chowdhury does not appear to have a job.

Kelli Fraser, a spokeswoman for Citizenship and Immigration, declined to speak about the specifics of Chowdhury’s situation, citing privacy rules. But she said failed refugee claimants who cannot be deported are typically eligible to apply for work permits if they have no other means of support. Chowdhury has little hope of qualifying for permanent residency because of his criminal background.

All of which points to a tedious drift into old age for Chowdhury—punctuated by the odd reverberation from his criminal past. Mujib’s grandson, for one, isn’t about to let him go softly into the Canadian night. “I will spend the rest of my life trying to get him back to Bangladesh,” says Sajeeb Wazed, who has been touted as a future leader of Bangladesh. “Nur Chowdhury is either going to go back at some point, or he’s going to have to spend the rest of his life hiding in Canada, like the dog that he is.” CHARLIE GILLIS




Browse

The assassin among us

  1. What a load of rubbish!! "The international community" gets to dictate what we can and cannot do. Bring on the “exceptional circumstances” clause and starting deporting them and they will stop coming.

    They have been trying to get rid of this former PLO for 20 years

    Ordered deported in '88, terrorist still in Brantford http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/46159

  2. I’m curious. You said “numerous accounts”. Who was alive (and aware enough) at the scene of the crime to vividly remember the dialogue being said, aside from the killers?

  3. I hate what this guy did in Bangladesh but the Canadian policy is the right one.
    The decision in this case is the Bangladeshis to make. Take the death penalty out of the equation and he will be extradited. Fail to do that and he stays. The Canadian policy is the decent and humane one, it should not give way to anything less. than it.

    • How could you ask the Supreme court of Bangladesh, a court that is honoured by 150 million people of that country as the most respectful institution, to undo its verdict. Who are you? Don't you respect the law of the land of other democratic countries? What do you think about USA? If this country were USA instead of Bangladesh, what would have been the role of Canada then?

      • Criminals are not extradited to the USA from Canada unless the death penalty is removed from the table.
        Why should you be any different?

        • oh yeah how come your prime minster doesn't seem to find the balls to tell obama to hand over omar khadr and have him extradited back to his country? Where does canada's record on child soldiers stand? if human rights were so important shouldn't you be crowing for the return of omar? take your double standards somewhere else.

    • Than Canada would be haven of all killers. This guy was in Bangladesh Radio on 15th of Aught 1975 proclaim that he was the main leader to kill all of Bangabandhu,s all family I was 14 years of Age.This trail take 15 years ib Bangladeshi court system. Killers all of them barge of their killing act. They also kill 4 leader in Bangladeshi jail 3rd Nov1975. So I ask all Canadian to answer are we Canadian whant this kind of killer in our country. I am living in Canada from
      1982.

      • If somebody has made it to Canada and is subject to its legal system, then it applies to them regardless. We as a nation abhor the death penalty and will not extradite folk to become its victim.
        Given the existence of a no-fly list now it is less likely that folk like this guy will come in the future, but if they do they will have the same legal protection. Or are you saying that people from Bangladesh should be treated apart from the rest of the people in Canada?
        Promise you won't kill him and he is gone. Insist that justice means murder and he stays. The choice is up to Bangladesh.

    • That means any assassin can go unpunished he he/she can take shelter in Canada!!!!!

    • Are you sure. The country of Bangladesh needs to punish Nur Chowdhury for what he done. The Candaidan government has to let him go.

    • A simple trick…! Verdict can be reviewed, this guy will go to Bangladesh. He will be sent to jail, and some mob will kill him in the jail. Very simple equation.

  4. We continue in this country to be the place to run to when your wanted or convicted of very serious crimes in other countries. So very wrong of our Supreme Court to preach to others countries about their Judicial system, especially when the case was open, transparent and considered fair. The cases mentioned in this article are only a drop in the bucket to what exits in the system. In the name of humanity we have lost all sanity as a country and become the dumping ground for the worlds most henious criminals, killers and despots.

  5. "I'm curious. You said "numerous accounts". Who was alive (and aware enough) at the scene of the crime to vividly remember the dialogue being said, aside from the killers?"

    Only a Muslim could come up with this pretzel logic.

    • I honestly don't understand how could Macleans let you write this outrageously preposterous comment! Muslims of Bangladesh are trying to punish criminals like Nur Chowdhury, and criminals exist in all communities! How could someone so disturbed and twisted in mind like you even get hold of a computer and internet connection is beyond me.

      • Oh, please. Listen to yourself! I love Canada and can't stand the denial of the history in this case by someone just because he's clearly a brethren. Read the article, Erwin, before you come out swinging.

        • :) This is a problem with most people posting on this article. They will attack your character when they cannot attack your position. From my view, either he did it, or he didn’t do it. And if he did it, he did a good thing– he killed a terrorist.

  6. @Saad, the assasssins went on air through television and radio to claim what they have had done, just the day after the incident. They gave interviews on numerous magazines, newspaper, international television channels including BBC. So, they are self-confessed murderers. They murdered not only Sheikh Mujib, but also his innocent family members. The list of the victims include two of Mujib's daughter in law in their twenties, one of them pregnant, another just married for a couple of days and 10 year old Sheikh Russell, Mujib's youngest son. I can't see how Canada or any other country's so called constitution can keep these criminals safe! Canada does not hesitate to deport retired Americans military personnel who would face illogical torture if they are sent back to USA. Canada does not care about a child soldier being locked up US Army during the best years of his life without any sane charges for decades. But it cares about Nur Chowdhury! This disgusts me.

    • A lot of Canadians do care about that child and the deserters, they also despise the death penalty. This current government maybe not so much.
      The SCoC found against this government in many cases that you highlight, the government just ignored them. The death penalty is wrong and is not Canadian, so why should we as a people ignore our own laws to export people to be killed via it?

      • Did you just agree that American deserters face "illogical torture" when they are sent back to the US from Canada?

        • Did I say that? Is reading comprehension a tad beyond you? Or are you just hoping to stir the poop?
          I said what I meant, not what you wish I had said.

    • @ Naveed, salute to you for your truthful statement!! He should have been punished long time ago..He's been living for way too long ..He's living a life thats not his.(shahosh koto) Joy Bangladesh .

    • Since they were in television and radio, are there any records of their statements. If there are no records, it can be claimed to be hearsay. I think it best for someone to accumulate these records and push it online for the public to see or claim that no records of these can be found. From what I have heard (again, hearsay), Mujib was a terrible president for life, given how his family members (and party supporters) were raping brides on their wedding nights. Again, hearsay.

      Either you prove “he done it” or you claim that you have no evidence “he done it.” Don’t bring up hearsay and condemn a man to death.

  7. A lot of genuine people cannot come to Canada as they are denied VISA. It is surprising how a self-confessed killer can get entry to Canada. Moreover the supreme court ruling has 'exceptional cases' which is to cover crimes against humanity. The Federal court of Canada has ruled in 2003 that the fugitive's crime was indeed a crime against humanity. Please see this link: http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-detail

    • Let me clear some things for you because it seems that either you did not read this article, or you did not care.

      1) He came to the US via tourist visa and sought asylum.
      2) He is not a self-confessed killer as he didn’t confess to it– in fact, he had an alibi for that night.
      3) Bangladesh is a third-world country which tortures prisoners into submission. I can beat you into saying anything, and more than likely, all those prisoners who accepted blame and pointed a finger at him were more than likely tortured. Don’t compare Canada’s judicial system with Bangladesh’s judicial system– they are worlds’ apart.

  8. First of all, the trial of the Mujib murder itself is a very debated and ‘fraud’ trial!! No just minded person can favour the trial in the first place. Besides, the current BAL government has already proved at few other instances how biased they are in terms of trials and enforcing laws. Therefore, it should not be wise for any justice seeker to depend on the BAList’s justices!!!

    Secondly, There was none among the mass people of Bangladesh who protested the killing of Mujib. In fact his death became a necessity at that time! Despite him being a great leader in the 1971 and later Bangladesh, he slowly turned into a real dictator whose vision was to establish a Bangladesh of his family and cronies!! This was vividly proven by his BAKSHAL, which was passed in the parliament only within 15 minutes!! His misuse of the power and resources brought him down from the peak of popularity to the highest point of hatred among the mass!! It is also reported that in many places people celebrated his murder with sweets!! In no way, his murder was unjustified! In fact, from a democratic sense, it was the most needed decision for the mass!!!

    Thirdly, the current PM Shaikh Hasina is also looking forward to establishing a BAKSHAL-like government, which is quite clear from her Vision 2021, and other rules enacted by her!! By supporting the government would mean supporting a dictator to come soon!!!

    Fourthly, the Mujib murder trial is totally a biased and personal will oriented trial. When the current PM was in power during her last tenure (1996-2001), she tried to try the murderers then. But due to a more stable judiciary system, she couldn’t do it within the time she had. But this time, she was lucky that the judiciary was already disordered by her 1/11 mastermind allies, which helped her to form a judiciary of her own choice, violating all the rules and laws of it! She hastily hung the accused, even without allocating them enough judicial facilities!!! This did not only shock the justice lovers of Bangladesh, but also proved to them once again how personal will oriented was the trial!! Similarly, it is just to see her father’s killer being hung, she wants Nur Chowdhury to be returned to her hand!!!
    We hope Canada will prove its justice once again!

    • Kumar, the trial was vetted by Amnesty International and deemed as fair. AI doesn't hand out the Seal of Approval easily.

      • That has been refuted by Amnesty International itself: "Amnesty's Secretary General for Canada, Alex Neve. He told us that it is not the organization's conclusion that the trial was fair that any trial in absentia is inherently unfair and that Amnesty opposes extradition to country where there is the risk of facing the death penalty" from the CBC.

        To those who have lived through the time of the trials in Bangladesh, we all know that the trial was intensely political and unjust to the accused at every stage. Their family members were harassed, abused, and held without charge on numerous occasions. This is not justice!

        Mr. Saha is right on the money about Mujib's totalitarianism of its day. He single handedly usurped the faith and trust of 80 million Bangladeshis and created a personal fiefdom in his day. This is well documented in academic and contemporary newsmagazines and reports. The AL government has always been revisionist about Bangladesh's history and continues its vindictive propaganda to this day. Just look at how they have treated the country's sole Nobel Peace Prize winner.

        • I was a grade 8 student and used live in Dhaka. I saw the plight of my dad to buy food for us, in spite of working for the government. Most of the officials were corrupted and habitual bribe takers. I saw the youths have few sets of ration-cards, used to buy the ration and selling those to the markets. No government control. Still I remember the lavish party of Jamal’s marriage, and those pictures in the newspapers. I was not fortunate to see Mujib closely. But my perception is, he was shrouded by his family members, extended family members, some yes-men with foxy attitude, and they all were greedy and voluptuous. Mujib was a great leader, but unsuccessful executive. He used to believe people surrounding him. But the crime this man has done should not go unpunished. And also those criminals no indulged in crime should also be punished.

    • It appeared and viewed by all recognized observers, the trial was considered fair and acceptable. With all circumstances, Mujib was a very patriotic leader. However, with the influences of some vested foreign powers, there were some unrest in the country. Mujib was trying his best. It is by no means acceptable that these confessed killers can kill a president of country including his innocent 10 -year old son. These killing were meant to change the course of the country and came from the defeated forces during our liberation war. You don't want to protect criminals who were directly involved with killings. It's up to the government to decide whether this convicted killer will be extradited or not after considering all facts

    • Judging by your name "Kumar Saha" my guess would be you're hindu. It's your political right to follow whichever party you want. But your personal hatred towards Bangabandhu comes very surprising to me. If it weren't for him saving Bangladesh, you including your family would have been exterminated long ago during the war in 1971.

      • He is using a Hindu fake name to prove that he is neutral. Don’t worry! Murderers assigned tons of IT experts to write for them. Its a part of propaganda. I heard, they have a huge budget as well. They offered 10 thousand pound per post to a renowned journalist. Its revealed now!

        • Heh, you are attacking someone’s character and not their position. What’s wrong with being a Hindu? Assuming you are a Muslim, let me attack your character. There are plenty of things wrong with being a Muslim from what can be seen in this world today.

          Also, how old are you? Were you cogent when these events happened? I’m endeavoring that you guys are all young pups who didn’t actually live through that era of hell.

  9. You are a rajakar.

  10. "As a country that is being looked upon, we should show example to the rest of the world"

    This is what Canadians should emphasis on. We are not even sure of these allegations, and even if they were, this 61 year old man saw the threat of the new born dictator, greedy for power, whose actions after the 1971 war clearly showed his intentions.

    Join on us on facebook – Candem http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1000021845

    Our government should not send him to his death. Join us and save this person's life.

    • Not sure of these allegations? He even proclaimed to be the murderer. Who is not sure of these allegations? Find one bengali who will deny

      Go ahead and kill the father of the nation. This is what happens in a politically corrupt country. But was it necessary to exterminate the rest of his family, torture a 9 year old boy to death?

      Yes our government should not send him to his death. Join Candem and save this person's life and set Canada as an example of a safe haven for more terrorists and criminals like him.

  11. An assassin, proven by his inclusion in the death squad, witnessed by testaments of co-assassins and other evidences, is nobody to a civic peace loving society. The magnanimity of his crime cannot just be set aside by a state that assumes punishment waiting for him in his home country where his hands were painted by blood of her own founding father. Nobody in Bangladesh and the world conscience never questioned the judicial process that brought Nur Chowdhury to justice for the heinous crime he committed 35 years back. Now, failure of the Canadian authority to deport him to Bangladesh to face justice, shall simply help brand Canada another terrorist country like Gaddafi's Libiya that harbored international terrorists for long.

  12. On what ground do you say the story was hyped up?

  13. It is hard for me to come to terms with the fact, a fugitive accused of killing a political leader along with most of his family members including his minor son, handicapped brother and pregnant daughter-in-law in a country can be treated as an all-protected guest of humanity in another country and when the host country is none other than Canada. It is more appalling when I see in this forum, there is sordid attempt of debilitating the total judicial system of Bangladesh just to safeguard the alleged killer. However to appease the debaters for and against the way this issue is being handled in Canada, may I request Canadian government, at the very least, to try Mr. Nur Choudhury in Canadian judicial system for the crime he has allegedly perpetrated against humanity.

  14. So a known killer/accomplice is granted residence in Canada…..
    isn’t this just what the US did in the years after 1946;the US did wrong then and Canada is doing wrong now.

Sign in to comment.