The New Nation - Internet Edition

Staff Reporter

Four detained former Ministers Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan, Motiur Rahman Nizami, Dr Khandaker Mosharraf Hossain and Shamsul Islam were interrogated yesterday at the central Jail Gate in connection with the Barapukuria graft case.

The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) Deputy Director Monirul Haque and investigation officer, who did the questioning, said that all the former ministers were questioned about their involvement in the case and all of them denied any misconduct.

The four senior ministers of the immediate-past coalition government, who are among 16 accused in the case, were quizzed separately at the Dhaka Central Jail. They all denied any transgression on their part in awarding the coalmine deal.

Jamaat chief and former Agriculture Minister Nizami was questioned first for about 90 minutes followed by 20-minute interrogation of ex-Information Minister Shamsul Islam.

Expelled BNP Secretary General and former LGRD Minister Mannan was questioned for 20 to25 minutes while former Health Minister Dr Mosharraf grilled for about an hour.

The lawyers of Nizami and Shamsul were present during the questioning while there was none for Mannan and Dr Mosharraf.

He said his main question to the accused was why the contract was awarded to a particular company without re-tender, causing huge loss to the country's exchequer.

"In reply, the ministers said they did not get that much time and they signed the files as put up to them," Monirul said.

Talking to reporters, Nizami's counsel Barrister Abdur Razzak said his client told the investigation officer that he had signed the file following the note sheet prepared by the Cabinet Secretary.

Razzak said Nizami insisted that due to awarding the contract to the particular company the Government had actually benefited.

"If cases are filed like this, no Government would be able tofunction," the lawyer quoted him as saying.

Razzak also said the case has been filed for "political reasons".

Quoting former Information Minister Shamsul, his lawyer Barrister Ruhul Quddus Kajal told reporters that the former minister had acted in accordance with the rules of business, a gospel that guides government function.

His client hoped that they would not be charge-sheeted as they did not commit any corruption, Kajal said.

Other accused, including Jamaat Secretary General and former Social Welfare Minister Ali Ahsan M Mujaheed, would be questioned immediately, informed the investigation officer.

The day's questionings took place following the interrogation of detained former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, the prime accused, on Saturday at the makeshift jail in connection with the high-profile case.

On February 26, ACC Assistant Director Shamsul Islam filed the case against Khaleda, 10 former powerful ministers of her cabinet and five others for causing a staggering loss of about Tk 159 crore to the exchequer through awarding the Barapukuria Coal Mine deal to the highest bidder instead of the lowest.

Former Finance Minister Saifur Rahman, ex-BNP Secretary General and LGRD Minister Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan, Jamaat Chief and ex-Industries Minister Motiur Rahman Nizami and its Secretary General and ex-Social Welfare Minister Ali Ahsam M Mujahid are the heavyweights among the ministers of the immediate-past coalition government accused in the case.

The other former ministers accused in the case are Health Minister Dr Khandaker Mosharraf Hossain, Agriculture Minister MK Anwar, Information Minister Shamsul Islam, Commerce Minister Air Vice-Marshall (retd) Altaf Hossain Chowdhury, Telecommunications Minister Barrister Aminul Haque and State Minister for Energy AKM Mosharaff Hossain.

The rest of the accused are former energy secretary Nazrul Islam, former Petrobangla chairman and incumbent BISIC chairman SR Osmani, former Petrobangla director Moinul Ahsan, former managing director of Barapukuria Coal Mining Company Sirajul Islam and Hossaf Group chairman Moazzem Hossain.

The case has been filed under sections 409/406/109/419/420 of the Penal Code and section 5(2) of the Corruption Prevention Act 1947.

Provision of the Emergency Power Rules was not used in the case, registered amid an ongoing drive in the interim period against corruption in high places.