While several leaders of these two militant organisations have already met their fate for wreaking death on innocent civilians, the law was yet to get its hands on those who had helped them to get organised, survive, and grow.

However, all but three of the sentenced are absconding. They had the chance to prove their innocence, but did not take it. Let the jurists opine whether that constitutes admission of guilt. But in the eyes of the law the instigators and aiders are as culpable as the perpetrators of the crime.

The court, in its preliminary remarks prior to delivering the judgment, termed the accused as accomplices of these despicable creatures passing off as human beings, because no human being can take innocent lives, at least not one who professes to follow the path of Islam which considers killing of even one innocent person as killing of the entire humanity.

Many would be inclined to consider the guilty, at least those who were politically linked with the BNP led alliance government and wielded tremendous clout, as sponsors of the extremists, for not only providing them support but also using undue influence to keep the state apparatus from getting at the extermists.

What defies rationale is the fact that from only a small beginning these groups gathered enough clout to conduct nation-wide bombings simultaneously, something not possible without help from elements within the administration and the law enforcing agencies.

Here we have an obscurantist group sponsored by some locally influential members of the ruling party to go after political opponents, not at national but at the local level, and for personal reasons alone. These radicals had their own motivation, and their interests and those of the politicians coincided.

They had their own agenda to fulfill and, given the political support to go after the leftists, found a receptive chord with the locals who were in any case unhappy with the activities of the members of the leftist underground. They exploited the link fully and, having been given the time and the space, organised themselves enough to emerge as a force to challenge the authority of the state.

Their leaders had all been in Afghanistan and had trained there. But their little minds could not fathom the difference between a country like Afghanistan fighting the Soviets, and Bangladesh where the Muslims are deeply religious but generally shun the path of extremism and violence.

It was interesting to see the then state minister for home eating his own words by acknowledging the fact that Siddiqul Islam (head of JMJB) was neither an amorphous substance nor a phantom created by the media, something that the alliance leaders were at pains to get the people to digest.

Siddiqul Islam's rise to a level strong enough to threaten the structure of the state, the history of the growth of the two radical groups, and, of course, the record of his activities, leave us with no other conclusion but that the two proscribed militant groups enjoyed the backing and encouragement of some members of the then ruling coalition of 4-party alliance.

They were helped also in part by the administration's unwillingness to acknowledge the possibility that such radical elements did indeed exist in Bangladesh. The court verdict validates that premise.

In fact, press reports linking the Islamic militants with the 4-party alliance had been appearing in the press off and on since 2004, which have been established through the statements of the arrested militant cadres, including that of Mufti Hannan during his initial interrogation.

This was a landmark judgment for several reasons. While not a single case of acts of terrorism has been adequately resolved, and one is talking of all the bomb and grenade attacks including one on the British High Commissioner, at least we know not of a single enquiry whose report has been made public and the perpetrators definitively identified, we have a case where abetment of the crimes of the religious extremists by the accused has been proved.

There are several others facing the same charge awaiting trial, and these were the very persons that the media, particularly the print media, had exposed as having links with the Islamic terrorists.

The country has suffered in many ways as a result of the militants' acts, and also by the way the cases have been handled. It gave those who were eager to depict Bangladesh as a potential Taliban state the grounds to justify their "prediction."

We suffered most because of the state of denial that the alliance government went into, with the result that proper investigation of these cases was frustrated because of political interference, as has been confirmed at the trial.

One is happy to note that the police have given the charge-sheet in the case of the grenade attack on Mr. Anwar Choudhury. This, one hopes, is only the beginning. There are other incidents of bombings that are to be fully investigated, and there are other personalities whose names have come to light that includes ranking members of the erstwhile alliance government, who must be properly investigated either to confirm or preclude their complicity in the militant activities.

While the convicted persons have been found guilty of aiding and abetting the militants at the local level, there are those who have done the same at the national level. Reportedly, one senior bureaucrat during the erstwhile regime is alleged to have backed the JMB and JMJB, having been himself a sympathiser of their cause and supporter of their activities.

There are reports of political links with other elements of the erstwhile alliance government that must not be taken lightly. If we are to succeed in our ant-terrorism efforts we must identify the sponsors of the militants. There needs to be a thorough investigation, because one suspects that there may be militant sympathisers within the establishment who act as sleeper cells and provide support to them in various ways.

There are two other cases that need to be resolved to the satisfaction of the people. The investigation of the arms haul in Chitttagong has gone nowhere, although we have a few accused under trial.

The issue is grave, since it demonstrates collusion of people in responsible positions, without whose complicity and guarantee of safe passage such a sensitive operation could never have been undertaken. The other is the 24 Aug 2004 grenade attack on the AL meeting.

The report of the one-man commission of enquiry is a secret, but the nation must be let in on the important findings of the commission. Both these case have serious implications insofar as our security is concerned. We need to also know what sort of measures the government has taken to prevent such acts being committed in future. After all, the matter of security is also a matter of public concern, about which they must be kept fully informed.

The author is Editor, Defence & Strategic Affairs, The Daily Star.