This is not an article seeking to question the versions of justice that are popular now or were popular in 2013. It is about the need to separate - at least in Bangladesh - the language of “justice for victims” from the question of fair trials and due process.

And the failure to do so is reflected in the misguided language used by Amnesty International in its press release, relating to the conviction of Sheikh Hasina - in which it claimed to know what was “justice” for the “victims.”

The press release was titled: “Justice for victims of 2024 massacre not served by death sentence against Sheikh Hasina.”

But this is simply not accurate. The victims themselves overwhelmingly believe that justice was served.

Amnesty went onto say, “Justice for survivors and victims demands that fiercely independent and impartial proceedings, which meet international human rights standards are conducted.”

Again, this does not reflect the victims’ own position. They are not demanding such proceedings.

The press release added: “The victims of July 2024 deserve far better.”

But, again, this is not what the victims say.

And had Amnesty International claimed the same thing about the 2013 trials, they would have been equally incorrect.

None of this means that Amnesty International’s criticism of the trial process is wrong.