Major Emdadul: Military officers should be tried under military law

In the wake of unprecedented arrest warrants issued by the Jamaat-controlled International Crimes Tribunal (ICT-BD) against dozens of serving and retired military officers, security expert Major (Retd.) Emdadul Islam has issued a stark warning: the nation’s armed forces risk irreparable damage to morale, discipline, and national security if civilian courts override established military legal protocols.

Speaking in a detailed interview on the Bipul Talk YouTube channel on Monday, Islam, a veteran officer with decades of service, dissected the controversy surrounding the detentions of 15 serving officers and five retired Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI) and director-general-level personnel.

His analysis, delivered with the measured candour of a career soldier, underscores the deepening fault lines in Bangladesh’s civil-military relations amid the interim government’s push for accountability over alleged crimes during the Awami League tenure.

Police to arrest, accused to be produced before court within 24 hrs of arrest: Tajul

The ICT-BD’s actions, which began with warrants against 26 individuals on October 8, have ignited a firestorm of debate. Charges include abduction, torture, enforced disappearances, and unleashing brutal force against protesters—offenses linked to the Taskforce for Interrogation (TFI) Cell of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) and the Joint Interrogation Cell (JIC) of DGFI during Sheikh Hasina’s 15-year rule.

These cases, part of a broader reckoning that has already seen warrants for over 30 people including Hasina herself, former Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan, and ex-Police Chief Benazir Ahmed, represent the first time in Bangladesh’s history that active-duty officers face trial in a civilian court for alleged crimes against humanity.

ISI Blueprint: 15 army officers implicated in ICT-BD case under custody

USS Fitzgerald in Bangladesh: Goodwill or geopolitical gambit?

Nijhoom Majumder: Six pillars of the state being systematically weakened

By October 11, the Bangladesh Army confirmed that 15 of the accused—nine retired, one on leave preparatory to retirement (LPR), and 15 serving—had been taken into “military custody,” a status the army describes as “attachment” rather than formal arrest. One officer, Major General Kabir Ahmed, Sheikh Hasina’s former military secretary, remains unaccounted for, prompting speculation of flight or evasion.

Major Islam, drawing on his intimate knowledge of military jurisprudence, argued that this jurisdictional overreach violates the Bangladesh Army Act of 1952 and ancillary regulations, which mandate that serving personnel—even those retired for up to one year post-service for offenses committed on duty—be investigated and tried exclusively through court-martial processes.

“The Army Act provides a comprehensive framework for internal discipline and justice, from summary courts for junior ranks to Field General Courts-Martial (FGCM) for senior officers, which can impose capital punishment if evidence warrants it,” he explained in the 45-minute interview.

He cited historical precedents, such as the FGCM trials following the 1981 assassination of General Ziaur Rahman, where death sentences were handed down and later challenged in the Supreme Court, as models for handling intra-military accountability without external interference.

The core of Islam’s critique lies in the perceived conflict between the ICT-BD—a special domestic tribunal established in 1973 to try war criminals, amended illegally post-August 5—and the military’s autonomous legal hierarchy.

Chief Prosecutor and former Jamaat lawyer Mohammad Tajul Islam, speaking to journalists after filing charges on October 8, asserted that the amended law strips accused officers of their “serving” status upon formal indictment, placing them squarely under civilian jurisdiction for crimes not defined in ordinary laws or military codes.

Warrants were dispatched to 13 authorities, including the Chief of Army Staff, Director General of DGFI, and National Security Intelligence (NSI), with orders to produce the accused in court by October 22.

HRW slams Yunus for abuse of Anti-Terrorism Act to suppress Awami League

Canada’s travel advisory for Bangladesh exposes volatile situation

Yet, Major Islam countered that such moves bypass constitutional safeguards, including Article 35, which enshrines the presumption of innocence and prohibits punishment without due process. “No officer should face premature punitive measures—like job loss, reputational ruin, or public shaming—before a fair trial,” he stressed, highlighting how the army’s initial denial of “formal arrest” has sown confusion over terminology.

In Bengali, “হেফাজত” (custody) is often conflated with police detention, while the military insists on “attachment,” a precautionary measure to preserve the chain of command pending clarification.

This legal ambiguity has ripple effects far beyond the courtroom. Army spokesman Major General Md Hakimuzzaman acknowledged on October 11 that the warrants have “affected morale” among troops, especially ahead of national elections, with officers expressing “unrest and dissatisfaction” over perceived political meddling.

Major Islam elaborated on the human toll, describing how the detentions—conducted in high-security facilities separate from families—erode trust in leadership and institutional integrity. The accused, many on deputation to sensitive units like DGFI rather than voluntary postings, operate under strict command structures, he noted, making personal liability distinct from collective accountability.

Public discourse has been lopsided, dominated by prosecution narratives of “crimes against humanity” without countervailing defense statements, fueling rumors and media misinterpretations. Social media, including recent X posts, amplifies this chaos, with users decrying the army’s “detachment” as evasion while others hail it as a bulwark against impunity.

Compounding the crisis, the ICT-BD’s net appears to be widening dramatically. Sources indicate charge sheets against over 150 additional serving and retired officers, including all Army Chiefs from 2009 to 2025, Bangladesh Air Force chiefs, and Navy personnel implicated in excesses against students during the July 2024 uprising that toppled Hasina.

Warrants for these could issue as early as October 15-17, targeting top brass from DGFI, NSI, RAB, Special Security Force (SSF), and President’s Guard Regiment (PGR), as well as military attaches abroad. Reports suggest political undertones, with accusations of “radicalized” junior officers plotting cantonment massacres against “pro-Awami League” or “pro-India” elements, and even foreign influences like Pakistani ISI operatives aiding ICT-BD probes. At least 10 officers have reportedly fled abroad despite travel bans and passport cancellations, evading justice in cases tied to state-sanctioned disappearances.

Major Islam placed these events in Bangladesh’s fraught historical context, likening them to the Zia assassination trials that tested military autonomy without fracturing civil-military bonds. He warned of “political manipulation” undermining the army’s honor—a vital institution forged in the 1971 Liberation War—potentially destabilizing national sovereignty amid economic woes, healthcare breakdowns, and education repression plaguing the post-Hasina era.

Public sentiment remains divided: while July uprising groups demand swift arrests, segments of the populace, including freedom fighter families and minorities, continue to view the military as a stabilizing force, complicating the narrative.

In his key conclusions, Major Islam advocated for a “delicate balance”: trials under military law to preserve discipline, transparent clarification of ambiguities by the government and army legal branches and ensured defense representation—potentially via military aid or civilian lawyers.

“The justice process must neither compromise the military’s dignity nor permit impunity,” he urged, emphasizing constitutional primacy over special laws. He called for national unity, imploring citizens to “respect the armed forces as guardians of sovereignty” and media to curb sensationalism that breeds polarization.