ICT-BD [ICT-21] Miscellaneous Case No. 01 of 2014 Order: 02 December 2014 served as the Nazi Party secretary, was indicted, tried, and sentenced to death, all in absentia, despite doubts as to whether he had even been informed of the proceedings. United Nations reversed its policy against trials in absentia with the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL or Lebanon Tribunal) in 2006. The STL allows trials "to commence and to end………… without an accused ever having showed up in court. The STL (Special Tribunal for Lebanon) expressly allows for trials in the absence of the accused in article 22 of the STL Statute, entitled "Trials in absentia." Article 22(1), lists the situations where the STL can hold trials in the accused absence. According to Professor William Schabas under section 22(1) (c) of the STL Statute, the accused may be tried in absentia when he refuses to appear after an initial appearance (absconded) or is otherwise unable to be found after all reasonable steps have been taken to inform him of the proceedings including media publication and communication with his known state of residence. Accused Abul Kalam Azad @ Bachchu could have due opportunity of being properly informed of the proceedings in advance if the warrant of arrest could have been executed. But by remaining absconded and leaving country the accused has willfully declined to exercise his right to be present for facing trial and as such under this circumstance, trial in his absence would be permissible "in the interest of the proper administration of justice." 50. However, merely for the reason of dissimilarity of provisions, in respect of holding trial in absentia or absence of provisions of holding ‘fresh trial’ in the Act of 1973 , the contemnor by his writing has made a futile attempt intending to identify the ‘ignorance of the Tribunal’ by blatantly discarding its authority, on this issue. Taking the binding effect of the Statute of 1973 in respect of holding absentia trial into account, the Tribunal simply observed whether abesntia trial is permissible even in international judicial forum. 51. At the out set, we ask the contemnor whether he is conversant with the Act of 1973 under which the Tribunal has been performing its judicial functions. Next, is he ignorant about the reason of holding absentia trial against Abul Kalam Azad? Does the contemnor not know how and at what stage of proceeding Abul Kalam Azad managed to flee, quitting the country? Simply showing compatibility of provision in respect of holding trial in absentia the Tribunal referred to the statute of 16