16th amendment illegal: SC

[Banglar Bir]

Unbridled State Power and a collapsed judicial framework behind enforced disappearances
September 2, 2017

Asia Legal Resource Centre 36th Session – September 2017, ALRC AT THE UN,
Bangladesh, Commission on Human Rights, Written Submissions August 28, 2017 August 28, 2017 Admin A Written Submission to the UN Human Rights Council by the Asian Legal Resource Centre

The Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC) wishes to update the United Nations Human Rights Council about the situation of Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances in Bangladesh.

Enforced disappearances are increasing alarmingly in Bangladesh since Mrs. Sheikh Hasina has become the Prime Minister in January 2009.

The victims’ families and the eye-witnesses have consistently accused the law-enforcement agencies including the national police and the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) for being responsible for enforced disappearances. Bangladesh continues to disregard the calls of the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID) and the Human Rights Committee to end enforced disappearances.

Instead, the government has defended its actions by denials, and guaranteeing impunity to the perpetrators.

The country’s law-enforcement agencies are engaged in this crime consistently for last eight years.

Judicial institutions are incapable of providing any protection of redress to the victims.

At least, 388 people have been victims of enforced disappearances, from January 2009 to July 2017.

In 2016, the law-enforcement agencies allegedly disappeared 91 people.

Within July 2017, at least 60 people have disappeared. These statistics represent only a partial reality.

This is because many families do not dare to speak against the crime due to intimidation, threats, and surveillance by the law-enforcement agencies.

At least, 113 of the victims of disappearances belong to the opposition political parties.

Human rights defenders associated with the ALRC have documented that the RAB, the police and the Detective Branch (DB) of the police are the main agencies that abduct and disappear people.

Statements by families of the victims and eyewitnesses confirm these.

Unidentified civilians claiming to be officials from the government have also been found involved in abduction and disappearances.

The victims’ families struggling to survive are facing threats/intimidation by the law-enforcement agencies.

Thus, lodging complains against disappearances is impossible since the complaint has to be filed with the police.

The Police, RAB, and the DB consistently deny their involvement in each of the individual cases of enforced disappearances.

Such denials are made directly to the relatives of the victims, journalists, and human rights defenders.

The acts of enforced disappearances are directly being supported by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Law, and personally the Prime Minister.

All of them deny allegations of enforced disappearances . The Ministers and the Prime Minister do not limit their act to mere denials.

By satirical/jokes over the alleged disappearance of the opposition leader, Mr. Salahuddin Ahmed, the Prime Minister has reiterated that the government has no intention of investigating the disappearances as long as Mrs. Hasina remains in office.

This indicates that the incumbent government has adopted a policy of kidnapping citizens, and this policy is being systematically implemented with impunity.

The government poses immense challenges on any attempt to seek redress for enforced disappearances.

In the case of Mr. Sheikh Mokhlesur Rahman a.k.a. Johny, a homeopathic doctor from Satkhira district town, reflects the struggles of the families of the disappeared in Bangladesh. The Satkhira Sadar Police, led by Sub Inspector Mr. Himel Hossain, picked up Mokhlesur at around 9:00 pm on 4 August 2016 from the New Market in Satkhira district town. The police raided Mokhlesur’s house after that at midnight without any warrant.

His wife Jesmine Nahar and father Sheikh Abdur Rashid found Mokhlesur detained in the police cell at the Satkhira Sadar Police Station on the following day, 5 August.

The police arbitrarily detained Mokhlesur without producing him before a Magistrate.

The police even did not record the arrest and detention. From August 5 to 7, while the family served food to Mokhlesur by bribing the police, who otherwise would not have provided food to a detainee.

On 8 August, the family found Mokhlesur missing from the police cell. The police did not produce him before any court or sent to any prison. The police officers denied disclosing the whereabouts of Mokhlesur when the family enquired about him.

The Police officers insisted that the family must not reveal any information to the media regarding the arbitrary detention and disappearance. The police also refused to register any complaint or General Diary (GD) entry regarding the arrest, detention and subsequent disappearance.

The victim’s wife repeatedly attempted to register a GD entry for months and got refused by the police officers. When all the efforts went in vain, in March 2017, Jesmine Nahar held a press conference and exposed the matter in public.

She also filed a Habeas Corpus Writ before the High Court Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. In May 2017, a Division Bench heard the writ and ordered a judicial probe into the matter.

Upon the High Court’s order, the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Satkhira district assigned Mr. Habibullah Mahmud, a Senior Judicial Magistrate, to probe the case.

The police officers lied to the magistrate during the investigation while the eyewitnesses and former co-detainees who stayed in the same police cell with Mokhlesur confirmed that Mokhlesur was detained for days in the Satkhira Sadar Police Station.

The judicial probe report has been submitted to the High Court Bench, which has not yet taken any action against the Police officers.

The judicial probe on Mokhlesur’s disappearance is the first ever publicly known investigation in any case of alleged disappearances in last eight years in Bangladesh.

The ALRC and its partners have documented several cases where the families had approached to the judiciary to seek legal redress.

Regrettably, there has been no effective remedy provided to the petitioners before the High Court Division.

Extreme forms of politicised recruitments to the higher judiciary has been one of the reasons why the judiciary is failing to take any action in the cases of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial executions and other gross violation of human rights.

The UN WGEID and the UN HRC needs to understand that Bangladesh’s human rights problems are directly related to political power grabbing or retaining strategies.

The incumbent Prime Minister and the collapsed justice framework are behind the systemic enforced disappearances and other severe forms of human rights abuses.

The Special Procedures, including the WGEID, needs to send further reminders to Bangladesh regarding their requests to visit the country.

The International Community need to accept that restoration of democracy in Bangladesh can only open the opportunity to stop enforced disappearances and other gross violation of human rights.

It must be coupled with rebuilding the justice institutions for the purpose of upholding the rule of law, which is not in existence at the moment. The article appeared in on 28/08/2017
- See more at: http://southasiajournal.net/banglad...ice-framework-behind-enforced-disappearances/

 

[Banglar Bir]

04:41 PM, September 03, 2017 / LAST MODIFIED: 05:04 PM, September 03, 2017
AL-led govt to act as poll-time supportive govt: Quader

Awami League General Secretary and Road Transport and Bridges Minister Obaidul Quader addresses a reunion of former students of Basurhat Government High School in Companiganj in Noakhali on September 3, 2017. Photo collected from his verified Facebook account
BSS, Noakhali

Awami League General Secretary and Road Transport and Bridges Minister Obaidul Quader today said the present government led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina itself will act as the supportive government during the next general election.

"BNP chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia went to the bank of River Thames (London) after making announcement of anti-government agitation. The agitation programme of BNP now remains confined in the vanity bag of Khaleda Zia. Let her come back to the country first, then we will see," Quader said.

He came up with the remarks while addressing a reunion of former students of Basurhat Government High School in Companiganj in Noakhali.

Presided over by Companiganj upazila vice-chairman Azam Pasha Chowdhury Romel, the function was attended by Noakhali-3 lawmaker Mamunur Rashid Kiron, principal of the school Mohammad Nurul Amin and upazila Awami League president Khijir Hayat, among others.

"Being a former student of this school, I have been able to come this far. I hope you all would be able to achieve greater success than me. In spite of being a lady, our prime minister is now being lauded all across the world. Bangladesh is now being recognised as Digital Bangladesh. We have now achieved exceptional success in cricket being patronised by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina," Quader said.

Earlier in the morning, he visited Companiganj upazila health complex and expressed discontent over the absence of doctors and nurses at the hospital. He also ordered the civil surgeon to show causes over the matter.
http://www.thedailystar.net/politic...m_medium=newsurl&utm_term=all&utm_content=all

 

[Banglar Bir]

‘প্রধান বিচারপতি ঠিকই বলেছেন’
"Chief Justice is correct"
এস এম আশিকুজ্জামান৩০ এপ্রিল ২০১৭ ১৮:০৫

ন্যায়বিচার নিশ্চিত করার স্বার্থে শতভাগ এমপির পাশ করা আইনও সুপ্রিম কোর্ট বাতিল করবে, প্রধান বিচারপতি সুরেন্দ্র কুমার সিনহার এ বক্তব্যের সঙ্গে একমত the former Awami League Law Minister stated প্রকাশ করেছেন সাবেক আইনমন্ত্রী শফিক আহমেদ।

শফিক আহমেদ চ্যনেল আই অনলাইনকে বলেন, ‘প্রধান বিচারপতি ঠিকই বলেছেন। ন্যায়বিচার নিশ্চিত করার স্বার্থে সুপ্রিম কোর্ট যে কোন সাংঘর্ষিক আইন বাতিল করতে পারেন। সুপ্রিম কোর্টের সে ক্ষমতা আছে। সকল সংসদ সদস্যের মতের ভিত্তিতে হলেও দেশের জনগণের অভিপ্রায়ের পরিপন্থী তথা সংবিধান পরিপন্থী কোন আইন সুপ্রিম কোর্ট অবৈধ ঘোষণা করতে পারে। বাতিল করতে পারেন।

রোববার জগন্নাথ বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের ভূমি আইন ও ব্যবস্থাপনা বিভাগের আনুষ্ঠানিক উদ্বোধন ও নবীন বরণ অনুষ্ঠানে প্রধান অতিথির বক্তব্যে প্রধান বিচারপতি বলেন, ন্যায় বিচারে বাধা সৃষ্টি করে এমন আইন যদি শতভাগ সংসদ সদস্য মিলেও পাশ করেন তবুও তা বেআইনি ঘোষণা করা হবে। এছাড়া সংবিধানকে সমুন্নত রাখতে সুপ্রিমকোর্ট পিছপা হবে না।

বক্তব্যে প্রধান বিচারপতি আরো বলেন, শুধু অর্থনৈতিক সমৃদ্ধি এলেই একটি দেশ আত্মমর্যাদাশীল হয় না, এর সঙ্গে প্রয়োজন আইনের শাসন। আইনের শাসন পালন করতে হলে প্রত্যেককে যার যার অবস্থান থেকে এবং সরকারকে আইনের শাসন মেনে চলতে হবে। উন্নত দেশের আইন প্রণেতাদের আইন জানা থাকে, প্রেক্ষাপটও জানা থাকে।
http://www.channelionline.com/প্রধান-বিচারপতি-ঠিকই-বলে/

 

[Banglar Bir]

Louder than words
Sohrab Hassan | Update: 12:28, Sep 03, 2017

The picture published online in Prothom Alo speaks louder than a thousand words. It is so much more than a mere photograph. It gives a sense of hope that perhaps a simple picture can change the political culture of Bangladesh. No matter what storms we may weather, we want to emerge from darkness into the light.

On Eid-ul Azha, people streamed to Gono Bhaban to exchange greetings with the prime minister Sheikh Hasina. People from all walks of life took this opportunity to voice their worries and woes. If she is in the country, the prime minister always meets the people in this manner. She tries her best to reach out and help them as far as she can.

Many pictures are taken during the two hours that the prime minister meets and greets the people. People are thrilled to take pictures with her and many proudly upload these on Facebook.

Television and online media showed the prime minister with foreign diplomats and also her feeding cricketer Shakib al Hasan sweets. Shakib’s victory certainly added a little more joy to this Eid.

However, the picture that stole the show was undoubtedly the one of the prime minister with the chief justice Surendra Kumar Sinha. The picture shows SK Sinha raising his hand, offering his salaam to Sheikh Hasina. They are smiling cordially at each other. This is a display of good taste. Individuals and institutions can have differences of opinion, but why should that stop normal interaction?

The chief justice exchanged greetings with the prime minister last Eid too, but the context is different this year. Much has changed. At a juncture when Awami League leaders and senior ministers are spewing out vitriol against the chief justice for scrapping the 16th amendment, this cordiality between the prime minister and the chief justice bears significance.

There were ministers who wanted to pack up Sinha and send him to Pakistan. They questioned his sanity. What will they have to say now? Some of those ministers and leaders were at the Gono Bhaban too. It would be interesting to know what their reaction was to this smiling exchange of pleasantries.

The chief justice, whom they had wanted to send to Pakistan, was at the Gono Bhaban interacting pleasantly with the prime minister. The prime minister received with warmly. So his detractors were thwarted.

Former justice Shamsuddin Chowdhury had even questioned whether the chief justice had written the verdict on the 16th amendment himself. He said that it was not possible to write a 400-page observation in such a short time, adding that it had been authored by Pakistan’s intelligence agency ISI.

One can only wonder the degree of animosity that could drive a former judge to spit out such venom. On 1 September the Daily Star pointed out how speedily the chief justice had passed the judgements regarding war crimes.

Actually the chief justice Sinha has done a great favour to the people and the country. Many judges would write the full judgements only after retirement. In fact, the judgement pertaining to scrapping the 13th amendment was written by the former chief justice ABM Khairul Huq 13 months after his retirement. Surendra Kumar Sinha issued administrative orders that all judges would have to complete the full verdicts before they went on retirement. When justice Shamsuddin Chowdhury went on retirement, he had a pile of pending judgements. Perhaps that is the root cause of his fury.

In the meantime, this picture of the prime minister with the chief justice will perhaps stem the steady flow of harsh criticism.
http://en.prothom-alo.com/opinion/news/158355/Louder-than-words

 

[Banglar Bir]

 

[Banglar Bir]

Parliament adopts resolution challenging 16th Amendment verdict
Syed Zainul Abedin Eiffel
Published at 09:01 AM September 14, 2017
Last updated at 09:55 AM September 14, 2017

Syed Zakir Hossain/Dhaka Tribune
The resolution also demanded removing ‘unconstitutional, objectionable and irrelevant’ observations by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha in the verdict

The parliament has unanimously adopted a resolution seeking legal measures against the Supreme Court verdict declaring the 16th constitutional amendment illegal.

The resolution also demanded removing ‘unconstitutional, objectionable and irrelevant’ observations by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha in the verdict.

Addressing the parliament, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina said: “The chief justice has dishonoured the President and raised questions about the role of father of the nation and the country’s independence.”

Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal lawmaker Moin Uddin Khan Badal placed the resolution in the House which was adopted by voice votes Wednesday night.

The top court on July 3 unanimously declared the 16th Amendment to the constitution illegal, stripping the parliament of its power to impeach Supreme Court judges.

Speaking about parliament’s freedom of expression, Hasina said: “In a democratic country, the judiciary, legislature and executive enjoy equal rights and they work as supplementary to each other.”

“The apex court does not have the authority to amend the Constitution,” she said adding that the Supreme Judicial Council which was formulated during the martial law has put the whole judiciary under the chief justice’s sole authority.

During the discussion, several MPs came down hard on the chief justice for his remarks regarding the verdict.

Law Minister Anisul Huq said the government would challenge the judgment which he dubbed “illogical and emotional”.

“The verdict has tarnished the image of not only the judiciary, but also of the country,” he said.

Commerce Minister Tofail Ahmed pointed out that the chief justice had asked the Anti-Corruption Commission not to conduct investigation against judges. “The commission can investigate graft charges against prime minister, me and all of us but they cannot investigate the charges against judges!”

Liberation War Affairs Minister AKM Mozzamel Huq demanded SK Sinha’s resignation claiming there were “many corruption allegations” against the chief justice.

Opposition leader in the House Raushon Ershad, Industries Minister Amir Hossain Amu, Deputy Speaker Fazle Rabbi Miah, Agriculture Minister Matia Chowdhury, Civil Aviation and Tourism Minister Rashed Khan Menon, Water Resource Minister Anisul Islam Mahmud, State Minister for Labour and Employment Mujibul Haque, Awami League MPs Dr Dipu Moni, Fazilatun Nasa Bappy, Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim, independent MPs Rustum Ali Faraji and Tahjib Alam Siddique also joined the discussion.
http://www.dhakatribune.com/banglad...esolution-challenging-16th-amendment-verdict/

 

[Banglar Bir]

Look East
September 25, 2017
Bangladesh chief justice Surendra Kumar Sinha has told friends and admirers in Tokyo that he is determined to ‘restore democracy’ in Bangladesh — something that has send a chill down the spine of those in power in Dhaka.

At a party hosted by Bangladeshi expatriates on Saturday, Justice Sinha said there were ‘many severe lacunae in Bangladesh’s practice of democracy’ and he was determined to effect course correction.

The ruling Awami League is especially nervous and uncertain about the Chief Justice after the Supreme Court on 2nd July unanimously declared the 16th Amendment to the constitution illegal, which means parliament no longer has the power to impeach judges of the apex court.

Bangladesh intelligence has received reports that a group of top lawyers are going to move the Supreme Court to declare election of 154 MPs, elected uncontested in 2014 polls, as illegal.
“That can lead to dissolution of the parliament and the army may step in,” one official said, adding that the Chief Justice aspires to become the next President of the country with military support.

“He is in touch with several generals, both retired and serving,” the official told LOOKEAST on condition of anonymity.

The Awami League government is especially worried after the seven-member bench of the Appellate Division, led by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha, upheld a High Court judgement that had scrapped the amendment, rejecting an appeal filed by the state.

“From now on, the Supreme Judicial Council will deal with the impeachment matters, not parliament,” Manzill Murshid, one of the petitioners against the amendment, told reporters after the verdict.

The chief justice said the court had some observations based on which it had rejected the appeal.

The court also said it would expunge some observations made by the High Court regarding the petition.

Attorney General Mahbubey Alam expressed frustration over the Supreme Court’s verdict, saying the Supreme Judicial Council had been scrapped by parliament and could not be restored automatically.

Claiming a vacuum has now been created, he said: “We will have a discussion with the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs to see if a review plea can be filed.”
He further said he was disappointed that the original constitution (1972), which allowed parliament to impeach Supreme Court judges, was not restored.

The 16th Amendment was passed by parliament on September 17, 2014, empowering the members of parliament (MPs) to impeach the top court judges for incapability or misconduct via two-thirds majority.

The amendment triggered debate on whether parliament should have such authority, and 9 Supreme Court lawyers filed a writ petition with the High Court on November 5 the same year challenging the legality of the constitutional change.

The High Court declared the amendment illegal on May 5, 2016. The government moved the Appellate Division against the High Court verdict on January 4, 2017.

On February 8, the Supreme Court appointed 12 senior lawyers as amici curiae, seeking their opinions over the legality of the 16th Amendment.

Hearing on the appeal began on May 8 and continued till June 1. During the hearing, nine of the amici curiae opined against the 16th Amendment, one in favour, while two refrained from giving an opinion.

During the hearing, the government counsel argued that the Martial Law authorities had inserted the Supreme Judicial Council concept when they were in power illegally, and the 16th Amendment was introduced to go back to the original constitution.

He said the amendment did not harm the original structure of the constitution.
In response, the writ petitioners’ counsel said the provision in the 1972 constitution, which empowered lawmakers to impeach judges, was scrapped through the Fourth Amendment in 1975 as the provision proved to cause more harm than good.

They further argued that ruling party lawmakers cannot vote against their party’s decisions due to Article 70 of the constitution, even if they disagree with the said decisions. Same could happen in case of the impeachment of a Supreme Court judge, they added.

The Fourth Amendment, passed in 1975, vested the power of impeaching Supreme Court judges in the president. The Fifth Amendment, brought on during the regime of military strongman Ziaur Rahman, made way for the formation of Supreme Judicial Council to impeach judges.

This amendment was declared illegal by the court later.

After scrapping the 16th amendment, the Supreme Court is now likely to take up a writ petition, hearings for which has been conducted over the last three years.

Noted jurist and former minister Kamal Hossain appearing as amicus curiae (friend of the court) in connection with a writ petition challenging the validity of the section 19 of the Representation of the People Order (RPO) had opposed the validity of the election of 154 MPs elected without contest in 2014 polls.

Terming unprecedented the 154 MP candidates’ election unopposed, Kamal, one of the framers of the constitution, submitted that the principle of the constitution was democracy, and all powers in the Republic belong to the people. “So, according to the constitution, the elected representatives will exercise their power on behalf of people,” he contended.
“Can we call those elected unopposed public representatives?” Chief Justice questioned.
The concern in the Awami League is that the Chief Justice and his bench may rule in favour of the petitioners and strike down the validity of the election of these 154 MPs.
If that happens, the parliament will be threatened by imminent dissolution and the present government will clearly be on oxygen.

Coming as it does after the reported failed assassination bid on Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, which was reported by, this is seen as a huge challenge by the Awami League.
http://bdpolitico.com/-p442-117.htm
BD Politico -
“রাজনীতিকে খাদ থেকে টেনে তুলতে বদ্ধ পরিকর প্রধান বিচারপতি সিনহা”

বাংলাদেশের প্রধান বিচারপতি সুরেন্দ্র কুমার সিনহা বাংলাদেশের রাজনীতিকে খাদ থেকে টেনে তোলার দৃঢ় প্রত্যয় ব্যক্ত করেছেন। জাপানে ব্যক্তিগত বন্ধু ও শুভাকাঙ্খিদের এমন কথা জানিয়েছেন। এ খবরে ঢাকার রাজনীতিবিদদের কানের কাছ দিয়ে শীতল স্রোত বইছে। খবর ভারতীয় অনলাইন লুক ইস্টের। এর এডিটর বির্তর্কিত সাংবাদিক সুবীর ভৌমিক।

খবরে বলা হয়েছে, গত শনিবার জাপানে এক নৈশ ভোজে প্রধান বিচারপতি বলেন, বাংলাদেশের রাজনীতিকে পোকায় ধরেছে। এভাবে চলতে পারে না। এটার শুদ্ধিকরন প্রয়োজন। এরপরেই ক্ষমতাসীন আওয়ামীলীগ সরকারের মধ্যে শুরু হয়ে গেছে মহা টেনশন এবং দৌড়ঝাপ।

খবরে বলা হচ্ছে, আগামী ২ অক্টোবর থেকে সুপ্রীম কোর্ট খুলবে, এবং তখন প্রধান বিচারপতি সিনহা বর্তমান সংসদের ১৫৪ জন বিনাভোটের সদস্যকে অবৈধ ঘোষনা করতে পারেন। এতে করে সংসদ বিলুপ্ত হবে এবং সরকারও বাতিল হবে। পরে একটি অন্তর্বতী প্রশাসন ক্ষমতা গ্রহন করবে। বিচারপতি সিনহার সাথে সেনাবাহিনীর বর্তমান ও অবসরপ্রাপ্ত অনেক জেনারেলরা যুক্ত আছেন। পরে জেনারেলদের সহায়তায় বিচারপতি সিনহা বাংলাদেশের রাষ্ট্রপতি হবেন।

কানাডায় ব্যক্তিগত কাজে এবং জাপানে সম্মেলনে যোগ দিতে যাওয়ার আগে বিচারপতি সিনহার সাথে বাংলাদেশের বর্তমান সরকার মারাত্মক বিবাদে জড়িয়ে পড়ে। সংবিধানের ষোড়শ সংশোধনী বাতিল করে দেয়া লিখিত রায়ে বিচারপতি সিনহার নেতৃত্বে আপীল বিভাগ বাংলাদেশের সংসদ, সরকার, আ’লীগের প্রাণভোমরা শেখ মুজিবকে নিয়ে কটাক্ষ করেছে রায়ে- এমন অভিযোগ তোলে সরকার। এরপরে থেকে ক্ষমতাসীনরা প্রধান বিচারপতির ওপর চড়াও হয়ে প্রথমে রায় বদলানোর চেষ্টা করে, ব্যর্থ হয়ে তাকে অপসারন বা পদত্যাগ করানোর নানা চেষ্টা করেও ব্যর্থ হয় সরকার। এ পরিস্থিতিতে পূর্বনির্ধারিত সফরে দেশের বাইরে যান বিচারপতি সিনহা। কানাডা নিজের কন্যাকে দেখতে যাওয়া এবং জাপানে বিচার বিভাগীয় আন্তর্জাতিক সম্মেলনে যোগদান শেষে থেকে গত শনিবার দেশে ফিরেছেন।

উল্লেখ্য, দু’দিন আগে এই লুক ইস্টের প্রধান এডিটর সুবীর ভৌমিক অন্যত্র এক রিপোর্ট প্রকাশ করেন, যাতে বলা হয় মাস খানেক আগে বাংলাদেশ প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনাকে হত্যা প্রচেষ্টার সাথে জড়িত ছিল তারই নিরাপত্তা বাহিনীর ৬/৭ অফিসার। পরে এ রিপোর্ট নিয়ে সেনাবাহিনীতে উত্তেজনার সৃষ্টি হলে প্রধানমন্ত্রীর কার্যালয় থেকে প্রেস রিলিজ দিয়ে বলা হয়- সুবীরের রিপোর্টটি মিথ্যা।

তবে এটা পরিস্কার যে, প্রথম রিপোর্টটির সঙ্গে বর্তমান রিপোর্টটির একটি যোগসূত্র আছে। আর তা হলো, প্রধান বিচারপতির ঐরূপ কোনো উদ্যোগ বা চেষ্টাকে ভন্ডুল করতেই শেখ হাসিনার হত্যা ষড়যন্ত্রের বানোয়াট খবর পরিবেশন করেন সুবীর। সে কাজে ব্যর্থ হয়ে এবারে বিচারপতি সিনহাকে নিয়ে এ প্রতিবেদন প্রকাশ করেছে। এ সপ্তাহ জুড়ে এরকম আরও রিপোর্ট আসার সম্ভাবনা রয়েছে।
http://bdpolitico.com/-p442-117.htm
Bangladesh Chief Justice determined to ‘restore democracy’
Look East – September 25, 2017
Bangladesh chief justice Surendra Kumar Sinha has told friends and admirers in Tokyo that he is determined to ‘restore democracy’ in Bangladesh — something that has send a chill down the spine of those in power in Dhaka.
At a party hosted by Bangladeshi expatriates on Saturday, Justice Sinha said there were ‘many severe lacunae in Bangladesh’s practice of democracy’ and he was determined to effect course correction.
The ruling Awami League is especially nervous and uncertain about the Chief Justice after the Supreme Court on 2nd July unanimously declared the 16th Amendment to the constitution illegal, which means parliament no longer has the power to impeach judges of the apex court.

Bangladesh intelligence has received reports that a group of top lawyers are going to move the Supreme Court to declare election of 154 MPs, elected uncontested in 2014 polls, as illegal.

“That can lead to dissolution of the parliament and the army may step in,” one official said, adding that the Chief Justice aspires to become the next President of the country with military support.

“He is in touch with several generals, both retired and serving,” the official told LOOKEAST on condition of anonymity.

The Awami League government is especially worried after the seven-member bench of the Appellate Division, led by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha, upheld a High Court judgement that had scrapped the amendment, rejecting an appeal filed by the state.
“From now on, the Supreme Judicial Council will deal with the impeachment matters, not parliament,” Manzill Murshid, one of the petitioners against the amendment, told reporters after the verdict.

The chief justice said the court had some observations based on which it had rejected the appeal.

The court also said it would expunge some observations made by the High Court regarding the petition.

Attorney General Mahbubey Alam expressed frustration over the Supreme Court’s verdict, saying the Supreme Judicial Council had been scrapped by parliament and could not be restored automatically.

Claiming a vacuum has now been created, he said: “We will have a discussion with the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs to see if a review plea can be filed.”
He further said he was disappointed that the original constitution (1972), which allowed parliament to impeach Supreme Court judges, was not restored.

The 16th Amendment was passed by parliament on September 17, 2014, empowering the members of parliament (MPs) to impeach the top court judges for incapability or misconduct via two-thirds majority.

The amendment triggered debate on whether parliament should have such authority, and 9 Supreme Court lawyers filed a writ petition with the High Court on November 5 the same year challenging the legality of the constitutional change.

The High Court declared the amendment illegal on May 5, 2016. The government moved the Appellate Division against the High Court verdict on January 4, 2017.

On February 8, the Supreme Court appointed 12 senior lawyers as amici curiae, seeking their opinions over the legality of the 16th Amendment.

Hearing on the appeal began on May 8 and continued till June 1. During the hearing, nine of the amici curiae opined against the 16th Amendment, one in favour, while two refrained from giving an opinion.

During the hearing, the government counsel argued that the Martial Law authorities had inserted the Supreme Judicial Council concept when they were in power illegally, and the 16th Amendment was introduced to go back to the original constitution.
He said the amendment did not harm the original structure of the constitution.
In response, the writ petitioners’ counsel said the provision in the 1972 constitution, which empowered lawmakers to impeach judges, was scrapped through the Fourth Amendment in 1975 as the provision proved to cause more harm than good.

They further argued that ruling party lawmakers cannot vote against their party’s decisions due to Article 70 of the constitution, even if they disagree with the said decisions. Same could happen in case of the impeachment of a Supreme Court judge, they added.
The Fourth Amendment, passed in 1975, vested the power of impeaching Supreme Court judges in the president. The Fifth Amendment, brought on during the regime of military strongman Ziaur Rahman, made way for the formation of Supreme Judicial Council to impeach judges.

This amendment was declared illegal by the court later.

After scrapping the 16th amendment, the Supreme Court is now likely to take up a writ petition, hearings for which has been conducted over the last three years.

Noted jurist and former minister Kamal Hossain appearing as amicus curiae (friend of the court) in connection with a writ petition challenging the validity of the section 19 of the Representation of the People Order (RPO) had opposed the validity of the election of 154 MPs elected without contest in 2014 polls.

Terming unprecedented the 154 MP candidates’ election unopposed, Kamal, one of the framers of the constitution, submitted that the principle of the constitution was democracy, and all powers in the Republic belong to the people. “So, according to the constitution, the elected representatives will exercise their power on behalf of people,” he contended.
“Can we call those elected unopposed public representatives?” Chief Justice questioned.
The concern in the Awami League is that the Chief Justice and his bench may rule in favour of the petitioners and strike down the validity of the election of these 154 MPs.
If that happens, the parliament will be threatened by imminent dissolution and the present government will clearly be on oxygen.

Coming as it does after the reported failed assassination bid on Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, which was reported by , this is seen as a huge challenge by the Awami League.
http://lookeast.in/bangladesh-chief-justice-determined-to-restore-democracy/

 

[Banglar Bir]

12:00 AM, September 16, 2017 / LAST MODIFIED: 02:25 AM, September 16, 2017
News Analysis: An inconceivable resolution by JS

File photo of the parliament session inside Jatiya Sangsad
Shakhawat Liton
This is inconceivable in modern democracy that the parliament passes a resolution to nullify a supreme court verdict. But our Parliament unanimously did it on Wednesday, setting a unique example.

Its resolution called for taking proper legal action to nullify the SC's recent verdict that scrapped the 16th constitutional amendment. In addition, it sought legal step for cancellation of some "objectionable, unconstitutional and irrelevant remarks" made by the Chief Justice in the verdict.
The resolution followed a huge outcry in and outside of the Parliament against the apex court for more than a year.

Some ministers and MPs in Parliament launched a vociferous attack on the High Court immediately after it declared the amendment unconstitutional and void in May 2016.

Again, they did the same in Parliament after the Appellate Division upheld the HC verdict in July this year. In both occasions, they participated in unscheduled discussions.

The attack on the apex court by ministers and ruling party leaders intensified manifold after the release of the apex court's full verdict on the 16th amendment case early this August.

They accused the Chief Justice of "undermining" Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's role during the country's Liberation War in 1971, an allegation that has no substance.

And finally on Wednesday in Parliament, more than a dozen ministers and MPs joined a marathon scheduled discussion. Some of them used abusive and indecent words to attack the Chief Justice.

In the past, the SC has declared unconstitutional and void four more constitutional amendments.

The present ruling Awami League has never blasted the apex court for scrapping three previous amendments—the 5th, the 7th and the 13th-- to the Constitution.

The nullification of the 5th amendment that validated the first martial law regime opened the window for the past AL-led government to bring major changes to the constitution in 2011.

Cancellation of the 13th amendment that had introduced the election time non-partisan caretaker government again provided the AL scope to abolish the caretaker government system in 2011 and to stay in power during the last election.

Twenty-seven years ago, in the fourth Parliament controlled by Ershad-led autocratic government, MPs launched a broadside against the apex court and its judges for the verdict to partially scrap the 8th constitutional amendment. They had done this in an unscheduled discussion and the then House did not pass any resolution.

Therefore, the vehement reaction of the AL against the cancellation of the constitution's 16th amendment that had empowered the Parliament to remove a SC judge on grounds of misconduct and incapacity took observers by surprise.
The passage of the resolution by the JS also raised the question whether the Parliament can enact a law to nullify the SC verdict.

An example of Indian Supreme Court's verdict will make it clearer. In May 2014, in the verdict on inter state water dispute case, the Indian Supreme Court ruled parliament and state assemblies had no power to enact laws to nullify judicial verdicts based on facts and findings.

“Under the pretence of power, legislature cannot neutralize the effect of the judgment given after ascertainment of fact by means of evidence/materials placed by the parties to the dispute,” said a constitution bench of Indian SC headed by then Chief Justice RM Lodha.

What does our government now want to do after the passage of the resolution by the Parliament?

Filing a review petition with the apex court seeking cancellation of the verdict or expunction of those "objectionable, unconstitutional and irrelevant remarks" from the verdict is also a legal step.

Will the government file review petition or move to do something extraordinary like passage of a law to nullify the SC's verdict?

In a democracy, the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary must function well and independently. It has been recognized worldwide for long that an independent judiciary is the cornerstone of democracy. Any attack on the judiciary amounts to putting the democracy, constitution, rule of law and citizens' rights at peril.

In recent years, the chief justices of Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Pakistan have faced the wrath of their governments for their strong, independent stances. This testifies that where democracy is fragile, the judiciary faces threat from the executive. The government attacks the courts when they question the government's arbitrary actions on legal grounds and declare them unlawful.

The continuous attack on the SC and CJ for the 16th amendment verdict may create the ground for Bangladesh to be put in the same bracket as Sri Lanka, Nepal and Pakistan.
http://www.thedailystar.net/frontpage/news-analysis-inconceivable-resolution-js-1462903

 

[Banglar Bir]

 

[Banglar Bir]

Chief Justice Sinha: Our judiciary is very strong
Tribune Desk
Published at 07:05 PM October 13, 2017
Last updated at 12:24 AM October 14, 2017

Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha Dhaka Tribune
In an interview with a news platform based in India, the chief justice said he had full confidence in the rule of law in Bangladesh
The judiciary of Bangladesh is very strong and capable of maintaining the rule of law, Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha has told an international news platform based in India.

The chief justice is currently on a controversial month-long leave of absence due to health issues, and was scheduled to leave Bangladesh for Australia on Friday night.

He gave the interview to The World Is One News (WION) by telephone for its news report “Bangladesh Chief Justice confined?”, which was published on Thursday.

“Our judiciary is strong and independent (and) the Bangladesh government is committed to upholding the country’s democracy and rule of law,” the chief justice said.

“I am confident that nothing will happen to my country.”
Also Read- CJ Sinha to fly to Australia Friday night
When asked by WION about his planned visit to Australia, Sinha said he was waiting for President Abdul Hamid’s approval of his application, and declined to comment further.

On Tuesday, the chief justice wrote to President Hamid informing him that he wished to visit Australia from October 13 to November 10.

A day later, the president signed a government order granting the chief justice and his wife permission to leave Bangladesh.
This article was first published on Bangla Tribune
http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2017/10/13/chief-justice-judiciary-strong/

 

[Banglar Bir]

04:05 PM, October 20, 2017 / LAST MODIFIED: 05:46 PM, October 20, 2017
16th amendment verdict: Team formed to file review

Star file photo
Star Online Report
A 11-member team has been formed led by the Attorney General Mahbubey Alam for filing a review petition against the Supreme Court verdict in the case on the 16th amendment to the constitution.

The Appellate Division of the SC upheld a High Court verdict that scrapped the 16th amendment to the constitution which had empowered the parliament to remove SC judges for incapacity or misconduct.
Read more: Supreme Judicial Council restored
The AG’s office has recently formed the team who are examining the SC verdict and the relevant policies of the constitution and laws for preparing the review petition, the AG’s office sources said.

The other members of the team are: Murad Reza and Momtaz Uddin Fakir, additional attorney generals, Motahar Hossain Saju, Bishwajt Debnath, Ekramul Huq Tutul, Masud Hasan Chowdhury Parag, Khandakar Diliruzzaman, Amit Talukdar and Rashed S Jahangir, deputy AGs, and Bashir Ahmed, assistant AG.
Also read: I’m not sick
Contacted, Attorney General Mahbubey Alam told The Daily Star that he formed the team with his colleagues for studying and examining the relevant law points for preparing and moving the review petition against the SC verdict on the 16th amendment to the constitution.

The review petition will be filed when it will be prepared, he said.

Replying a question, Mahbubey Alam said that in the review petition the government will pray to the apex court to restore the parliament’s power to remove SC judges for incapacity or misbehaviour.

He said that he has informed the government about formation of the group.

The apex court on August 1 released the full text of its verdict, scrapping the 16th amendment to the constitution that had given parliament the power to remove SC judges for misconduct or incapacity.
http://www.thedailystar.net/country...court-verdict-body-formed-file-review-1479304

 

[Banglar Bir]

Will the Sinha to Miah transition solve the crisis?
Afsan Chowdhury, October 21, 2017

Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha
Chief Justice Sinha is already history after his flight to Australia amidst much drama and corruption allegations made by the Government. His has been a dramatic regime anyway which began with calls to uphold the supremacy of the Judiciary and resist the Executive, a kind of a call to conflict between two organs of the State not seen before.
However, after the verdict of the 16th amendment which had given powers to the Parliament to impeach judges was cancelled by a full bench verdict of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Sinha, the conflict became a confrontation.
From decision to agitation to petition
The Awami League (AL) Government mounted a massive political campaign against the verdict including street agitation in response and hostility was open. The verdict was seen as Justice Sinha’s handiwork although all the Justices had signed it.
He was specifically targeted and calls for his resignation, sacking, expulsion and exile were publicly made. When the Observations of the Verdict was published all hell broke loose as the ruling party Awami League saw it as an affront to Sheikh Mujib, the Father of the Nation, an absolute sacrilege.
At this point the conflict became a personal matter for Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina the daughter of Sheikh Mujib.
The conflict reached a point of no return.

The subsequent decision by the Parliament to legally challenge the verdict seeking review and Sinha’s relative reticence after conducting a war of words may have seemed a cooling down phase but as later events show, the relationship had broken down.
Meanwhile there was speculation including in regional media that Justice Sinha had said while visiting Japan that that he would ‘restore democracy in Bangladesh’.
The report published in Look East portal and written by Subir Bhaumik also said that a writ by 153 eminent lawyers would be filed challenging the election of 2014 and it might be a prelude to a takeover by a section of civil and military forces.

In the midst of this turbulence Justice Sinha returned and the situation escalated almost immediately. It was rumoured that he was under house arrest. The Law Minister displayed a letter written by Sinha written to the President seeking leave as he was sick. It claimed he was going abroad for medical treatment.

Meanwhile, a lot of speculation swirled around with Opposition party BNP claiming that Sinha was being pushed out forcibly and general confusion reigned.

Finally, as he was about to go the airport, he talked to media at the official residence’s gate and dramatically handed over a letter saying how he was leaving to ‘uphold the Judiciary’s prestige’, that the PM was misinformed about the 16th amendment verdict who was unhappy with him and finally that he was not sick at all.

As he flew out, — some say forced — the Supreme Court Registrar’s office sent a letter to media stating that the rest of the Justices of the Supreme Court had refused to sit with him on the same bench after the President had handed over document relating to the CJ’s corruption and he had failed to explain them properly to the bench members.
This led to the decision to abstain and the Registrar to publicly inform, both unprecedented matters. This was followed by transfer of Supreme Court officers including the Registrar.

The episode had all the elements of a political thriller but with the next in line Justice Wahab Miah presiding as the acting CJ the thriller extends. And much of that drama may centre around the controversial judgment on the 16th amendment which may soon come under review.
From Sinha to Miah
But it’s a very difficult phase for acting Chief Justice Bhuiyan and the SC as the review petition filed by the Government reaches him and the bench. All the members are a party to the verdict which is being challenged.
If the Verdict is retained the political cost will be high for the government as it means all the political agitation was not right.
So, unless it is revised the Government will lose its political face and with elections scheduled in 2018 this will be a negative matter.
And BNP will claim a moral victory and try to use that in the election.

On the other hand, if it is significantly altered in response to the review petition, the Supreme Court will look ‘weak and compromising’ since the bench had earlier given a Verdict and Observation which has caused so much ‘mayhem’ and slammed the entire governance system.

Any major shift from the Justice Sinha led verdict will arouse suspicion about the current Supreme Courts ability to withstand political pressure. That will damage the credibility of both the party in power and the government not to mention the Judiciary.
And BNP will claim that the AL government has forced out a strong CJ and pushed in the acting Chief Justice to bend the bench according to its will. That will translate into a political cost as well.

Thus, it’s not a win-win situation at all for the government, the party or the Supreme Court and by extension the Judiciary.
How the situation will unfold in the next few months will show if the governance system has gained maturity or not.
https://southasianmonitor.com/2017/10/21/will-sinha-miah-transition-solve-crisis/

 

[Banglar Bir]

Second Phase of Judicial Coup begins
জুডিশিয়াল ক্যুর দ্বিতীয় ভাগ শুরু

2017/11/14
হাইকোর্ট
জুডিশিয়াল ক্যুর দ্বিতীয় ভাগ শুরু
Writ petetion against 154 decleared as MP's without contesting elections is being revived once more ১৫৪ জন সংসদ সদস্যের বিনা প্রতিদ্বন্দ্বিতায় নির্বাচনকে চ্যালেঞ্জ করে রিট আবেদনটি আবার সচল হচ্ছে। হাইকোর্টের রায়ের বিরুদ্ধে আপিল শুনানির জন্য রিটকারীর আইনজীবীরা date of the next hearing will be announced soon খুব শিগগিরই আদালতে তারিখ চাইবেন।

ড. কামাল হোসেন Dr. Kamal Hossain will be the prime Lawyer এই রিট মামলায় মূখ্য আইনজীবী হিসেবে থাকবেন বলে জানা গেছে। রিটকারীদের পক্ষ থেকে বলা হয়েছে, নতুন প্রধান বিচারপতি নিয়োগ পাওয়া মাত্রই আমরা বিষয়টি আদালতে শুনানির জন্য তারিখ প্রার্থনা করব।
এটাকে জুডিশিয়াল ক্যু এর দ্বিতীয় ভাগ হিসেবে মনে করছে সংশ্লিষ্টরা।
"This writ petition has been termed as the Second phase of the Judicial Coup"
২০১৩ সালের ১৭ ডিসেম্বর খন্দকার আব্দুস সালাম ১৫৪ জন সংসদ সদস্যের বিনা প্রতিদ্বন্দ্বীতায় নির্বাচিত হবার বৈধতা চ্যালেঞ্জ করে বাংলাদেশের সুপ্রিম কোর্টের হাইকোর্ট ডিভিশনে একটি রিট আবেদন করেন।

রিট আবেদনে তিনি writ against Public represtational acts গণপ্রতিনিধিত্ব আদেশের 19 (1)১৯ (১) ধারাকে চ্যালেঞ্জ করেন।
রিট আবেদনে গণপ্রতিনিধিত্ব আদেশের ১৯(১) কে সংবিধানের 65(2) of the Constitution are contradictory to 19(1)৬৫(২) এর সঙ্গে সাংঘর্ষিক বলে দাবি করা হয়।
৬৫(২) অনুচ্ছেদে প্রত্যক্ষ নির্বাচনের মাধ্যমে সংসদ নির্বাচনের কথা বলা আছে। আর গণপ্রতিনিধিত্ব আদেশের ১৯(২) তে বলা হয়েছে অন্য কোনো প্রার্থী না থাকলে একজন প্রার্থী বিনা প্রতিদ্বন্দ্বিতায় নির্বাচিত হবেন।

হাইকোর্ট বিভাগে বিচারপতি মির্জা হোসেন হায়দার ও বিচারপতি খুরশীদ আলমের ডিভিশন বেঞ্চে শুনানি হয়। হাইকোর্ট এই রিট আবেদন নিষ্পত্তিকালে ৫জন এমিকাস কিউরির বক্তব্য শোনেন। এরা হলেন ড. কামাল হোসেন, বদিউল আলম মজুমদার, ব্যারিস্টার রফিকুল হক,আজমালুল হোসেন কিউসি এবং ব্যারিস্টার রোকন উদ্দিন মাহমুদ। ব্যারিস্টার মওদুদ আহমেদকে এমিকাস কিউরি হিসেবে আমন্ত্রণ জানানো হলেও, তিনি ব্যক্তিগত কারণে তাঁর মতামত দিতে অপারগতা প্রকাশ করেন। দীর্ঘ শুনানির পর হাইকোর্ট বিভাগ তার রিট আবেদনটি নাকচ করে দেয়।
২০১৪ সালের ১৯জুন হাইকোর্টের রায়ের পর, রায়ের বিরুদ্ধে আপিল করা হয়। কিন্ত আপিল আবেদন করা হলেও না সরকার পক্ষ না আপিল কেউই মামলা শুনানির জন্য আপিল বিভাগে তাগাদা দেননি।

এরই মধ্যে সংবিধানের ষোড়শ সংশোধনী মামলা শুনানিতে এমিকাস কিউরি ড. কামাল হোসেন বিনা প্রতিদ্বন্দ্বিতায় ১৫৪জন এমপির নির্বাচনকে অবৈধ ও অসাংবিধানিক বলে মন্তব্য করেন। ড. কামাল হোসেন তার মতামতে বলেন, ‘এই সব অনির্বাচিত ব্যক্তিদের হাতে সুপ্রিম কোর্টের বিচারপতিদের অপসারণের ক্ষমতা প্রদান নিরাপদ নয়।

‘৭ জন বিচারপতির মধ্যে আপিল বিভাগের ৫জন বিচারপতি তাদের রায়ে ড. কামাল হোসেনের এই উদ্ধৃতি উল্লেখ করেছেন। বিচারপতি সৈয়দ মাহমুদ হোসেন তাঁর রায়ে এ প্রসঙ্গ উল্লেখ করেননি । এই বিষয়ে মির্জা হোসেন হায়দারের রায়েও কিছু পাওয়া যায়নি। উল্লেখ্য, মির্জা হোসেন হায়দার ছিলেন হাইকোর্টে এই রিট শুনানির জ্যেষ্ঠ বিচারপতি। তাই আপিল বিভাগে এটা শুনানি হলে, তিনি তা শুনতে পারবেন না।

ড. কামাল হোসেনের ঘনিষ্ঠ সুত্রগুলো জানাচ্ছে, তাঁর চেম্বার এই মামলার homework for this case is being done in Dr. Kamal's Chamber হোমওয়ার্ক করেছে। ওই চেম্বারের একজন আইনজীবী নাম প্রকাশ না করার শর্তে বলেছেন, ‘ষোড়শ সংশোধনীর রায়ে আপিল বিভাগ শুধু ওই সংশোধনীই বাতিল করেনি বরং এমন কিছু মন্তব্য করেছে যাতে সংবিধানের ৭০ অনুচ্ছেদ বাতিল হবে এবং বিনা প্রতিদ্বন্দ্বিতায় নির্বাচিত ১৫৪জন সংসদ নির্বাচনও অবৈধ হবে।’

তাঁর মতে, এটা যদি অবৈধ হয়, তাহলে বর্তমান সংসদ আপনা আপনি বাতিল হয়ে যাবে। রাষ্ট্রপতিকে তখন অস্থায়ী সরকার গঠন করতে হবে। ড. কামালের নিশ্চুপ থাকার একটি বড় কারণ সম্ভবত তিনি দেখতে চাচ্ছেন কে নতুন প্রধান বিচারপতি হন। এজন্যই তিনি বিচারপতি সিনহার পক্ষে কোনো মন্তব্য করেননি। তিনি অপেক্ষায় আছেন। ড. কামলের ঘনিষ্ঠ সূত্রগুলো বলছে, বিচারপতি আবদুল ওয়াহ্হাব মিঞা প্রধান বিচারপতি হলে ড. কামাল খুশি হবেন।

ড. কামাল হোসেনের নেতৃত্বে সুশীল সমাজের প্রতিনিধিরা অপেক্ষা করছেন।, সরকার কখনো ষোড়শ সংশোধনীর বিভিউ আবেদন করে। তখনই ১৫৪ জন সংসদ সদস্যের বৈধতা চ্যালেঞ্জ করা আপিলটি সচল করা হবে।
Bangla Insider
বাংলা ইনসাইডার
http://monitorbd.news/2017/11/14/জুডিশিয়াল-ক্যুর-দ্বিতীয়/

 

[Banglar Bir]

Democracy can’t function without independent judiciary
Faruque Ahmed
Vital state organs of the state are losing authority and becoming demoralized as the government is seemingly exercising its power over them to hold them under firm control in the context of national politics.
People are witnessing how the state is arbitrarily using its power making the state organs fail to work as per their mandate.
The resignation of Chief justice (CJ) SK Sinha last week while abroad in a highly volatile political climate centering the verdict on 16th amendment to the constitution is no more a surprise and it has shocked the nation.
The departure of a CJ in humiliating condition is not honorable to the nation and for a functioning democracy.
In fact, it has left a bad precedence.
Lamentable orchestration
Attorney General (AG) Mahbubey Alam has however welcomed it and said the judiciary has been relieved as he was not tolerated and facing the ire of the ruling party following the verdict over the 16th amendment declaring it unconstitutional.

But many others believe the unusual resignation of the CJ has robbed whatever independence the higher judiciary was enjoying as the place of last resort for people to seek justice.
One commentator said the judiciary is now in the dust.

He said without a strong and independent judiciary, weak and helpless people would have no protection against the functionaries of the government and other powerful people within the ruling establishments.

Most cases come to the higher judiciary in which ministers, law makers and powerful ruling party men are accused of grabbing property, unlawful confinements, rigging election and so on.
Judges can’t hear such cases freely if they are not free from fear of making the power that be unhappy and risk losing jobs.

The verdict in question had struck the power of parliament to impeach the Supreme Court Judges with some critical observations of the functioning of the government.

Since CJ Sinha was not ready to bow to pressure of the government to rewrite the verdict, he was ultimately forced to go on leave in September. On return home the CJ remained confined at his official residence for 12 days barring from attending the court.

Meanwhile, he was forced to go on further leave for ‘treatment’ to Australia last month though he claimed he was not sick and finally resigned from Singapore last week.
The AG and law minister, meanwhile, provided 11 charges against Mr. Sinha that include corruption and moral turpitude and quoted other Judges of the Supreme Court bench that they would not sit with him on the bench for his corruption record.
He was, however, considered a highly honest person before giving his verdict on the 16th constitutional amendment.
Questions that need answer
The Attorney General said the fate of the CJ was in fact sealed following the decision of the other Supreme Judges to boycott him and judiciary was finally relieved of his burden on the resignation.
But is it the case indeed?

Most people believe what happened to the CJ was sooner or later expected to happen given the ruling party’s indulgence in vindictive politics. But the question is why the other Supreme Court Judges who formed the bench had unanimously passed the verdict on the 16th amendment to uphold the independence of Judiciary from parliament have decided to boycott the CJ; and why they didn’t speak out themselves is a question lingering in the peoples’ mind.

The lower judiciary is already in the firm grip of the administration to control political cases and many fear if the higher judiciary becomes similarly boneless, the separation of power and independence of judiciary will totally become meaningless.

In fact, everything is now being steadily becoming centralized at one place. Parliament is in the firm control of the ruling party; higher judiciary is in the book while political space to the opposition is long being denied.
The expectation of a fully working democratic nation where rule of law will protect the weak is fading away fast.

The government is not issuing the gazette for service rules of lower judiciary to hand over control of lower court judges to the Supreme Court. As the situation is developing, no one can hope such a thing will happen soon.

Meanwhile, a case related to a former Supreme Court Judge Mr. Joynul Abedin has opened a bigger constitutional issue. He was appointed in 1991 and retired in 2009.
His wealth statement came under Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) scanner on retirement and as he claims he was facing harassment.
Is law taking its course?
Reports said the Supreme Court Registrar issued a letter to the ACC on the instruction of former CJ asking the anti-graft body to stop processing the case since it involves a Supreme Court Judge who deserves to be handled by the Supreme Judicial Council.

Since the government does not accept the 16th amendment verdict and therefore, the restoration of the Supreme Judicial Council, many believe it was pushing the ACC to revive investigation and proceed with the prosecution.

Meanwhile, a High Court bench disposed the full verdict on the matter last week saying the letter from the Registrar’s office to ACC was unlawful asking to stop the case and moreover it has tarnished the image of the Supreme Court. ACC, therefore, can go with the case.

Again the question is, when parliament’s authority to impeach Supreme Court Judges exist no more and the government also does not accept Supreme Judicial Council to try Supreme Court Judges, whether the ACC is the right place to try a Supreme Court Judge.

There exist a big vacuum and a case of arbitrariness comes out of an extra-constitutional outlook of the government. Supreme Court Judges can’t be treated like ordinary criminals.
What is interesting is that the High Court in a ruling recently has accused the ACC of failing to investigate and prosecute powerful people engaging in high level of corruption and irregularities.

In fact ACC is failing to carry out its functions fairly and impartially when it involves powerful people. But its handling of a case of Supreme Court Judge despite a letter from the Supreme Court clearly speaks about some excesses perhaps on political pressure from the power that be.
http://www.weeklyholiday.net/Homepage/Pages/UserHome.aspx

 

[Banglar Bir]

আকবর আলি খানের বই থেকে
মিথ্যা দিয়ে শুরু... মিথ্যা দিয়ে শেষ Started with lies.....Ended with lies.
প্রথম পাতা
স্টাফ রিপোর্টার | ১৮ নভেম্বর ২০১৭, শনিবার | সর্বশেষ আপডেট: ১২:১৫

কথাটি বঙ্গবন্ধু শেখ মুজিবুর রহমানের।
বাংলাদেশের বিচারব্যবস্থা নিয়ে বঙ্গবন্ধু অসমাপ্ত আত্মজীবনীতে লিখেছেন, ‘আমাদের দেশে যে আইন, সেখানে সত্য মামলায়ও মিথ্যা সাক্ষী না দিলে শাস্তি দেয়া যায় না। মিথ্যা দিয়ে শুরু করা হয়, আর মিথ্যা দিয়ে শেষ করতে হয়।
যে দেশের বিচার ও ইনসাফ মিথ্যার ওপর নির্ভরশীল সে দেশের মানুষ সত্যিকারের ইনসাফ পেতে পারে কি না সন্দেহ!’ আজ থেকে অনেক বছর আগে বিচারব্যবস্থা নিয়ে বঙ্গবন্ধুর সেই উপলব্ধি আজও সেখানেই আছে।
বৃটিশ বিদায়ে পাকিস্তান এসেছে। মুক্তিসংগ্রামের মধ্যদিয়ে বাংলাদেশের জন্ম হয়েছে।

কিন্তু বিচারালয়ের অবস্থা কতটুকু বদলেছে? দিনবদলের ইতিহাসে নানা উত্থান-পতনে গণতান্ত্রিক সমাজব্যবস্থার এই সময়ে এখনও বিচারালয়ের দরোজায় ন্যায়বিচারের জন্য ঘুরছে মানুষ।

ব্র্যাক বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের প্রকাশিত ঝঃধঃব ড়ভ এড়াবৎহধহপব ইধহমষধফবংয্থ-২০১৪/১৫ সালের প্রতিবেদনে সদ্য পদত্যাগী প্রধান বিচারপতি সুরেন্দ্র কুমার সিনহার দেয়া তথ্যে দেখা গেছে, ২৪ লাখ ৯৫ হাজার ৯৯৪টি মামলা জেলা আদালতে এবং ৩ লাখ ৬৫ হাজার ৫৯টি মামলা সুপ্রিম কোর্টে অনিষ্পন্ন।

২০১৬ সালের ১১ই জানুয়ারি বিচারপতি সুরেন্দ্র কুমার সিনহা এক অনুষ্ঠানে বলেছেন, দেশের আদালতগুলোয় ৩০ লাখ মামলা বিচারাধীন, এর মধ্যে ৩ লাখ উচ্চ আদালতে। আশঙ্কার জায়গা হচ্ছে- দিন যত যাচ্ছে মামলাজট ততই বাড়ছে। শুধু যে বাংলাদেশে এ চিত্র তেমনটি নয়।

এটি পাশের দেশ ভারতেও। সেখানে বর্তমানে প্রায় ৩ কোটি মামলা বিচারাধীন। ২০০০ সালে অবিনাশ দীক্ষিত হিসাব করেছিলেন, যে হারে ভারতে বর্তমানে মামলা নিষ্পত্তি হচ্ছে তাতে এসব মামলা নিষ্পত্তি হতে ৩২৪ বছর লাগবে। সেই পরিপ্রেক্ষিতে আশঙ্কা করা হচ্ছে, বাংলাদেশের অনিষ্পন্ন মামলা নিষ্পত্তি করতে কয়েক শ’ বছর লেগে যাবে।

তত্ত্বাবধায়ক সরকারের সাবেক উপদেষ্টা ও অভিজ্ঞ আমলা ড. আকবর আলি খান তার সুলিখিত ‘অবাক বাংলাদেশ, বিচিত্র ছলনাজালে রাজনীতি’ বইতে বিচারব্যবস্থার মূল সমস্যাসমূহ চিহ্নিত করে এর সমাধান খুঁজেছেন। বইটি প্রকাশ করেছে প্রথমা।

বিচারালয় নিয়ে বঙ্গবন্ধুর উদ্ধৃতির উদাহরণ দিয়ে ব্যক্তিগত জীবন অভিজ্ঞতার আলোকে ড. আকবর আলি খান তার বইতে লিখেছেন, পাকিস্তান সিভিল সার্ভিস একাডেমিতে আইন পড়ি। সাক্ষ্য আইন আমাদের পড়াতেন পাঞ্জাব বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের আইনের ডিন ইমতিয়াজ আলী শেখ। তিনি ক্লাসে এসে একটি মামলায় সাক্ষীরা কী বলেছে, সেটার উদাহরণ দিয়ে তিনি এই মামলার ক্ষেত্রে বিচারক হিসেবে আমাদের রায় কী হবে, তা জানতে চান? তখন বয়স অল্প। সঙ্গে সঙ্গে জবাব দিয়ে দিলাম। জবাবটি শুনে অধ্যাপক মহোদয় হাসলেন এবং বললেন:

উদাহরণ দিয়ে তিনি বললেন, ধরুন দুজন লোকের মধ্যে ঝগড়া হলো এবং এক পক্ষ আরেক পক্ষকে গালিগালাজ করলো। তারপর ক্ষুব্ধ পক্ষ প্রতিশোধ নেয়ার জন্য উকিলের কাছে গেল। উকিল বলবেন, গালাগালির জন্য মামলা করলে আসামিকে যথেষ্ট শাস্তি দেওয়া যাবে না। শাস্তি দিতে হলে তার বিরুদ্ধে কমপক্ষে ছুরি দিয়ে আঘাত করার মামলা করতে হবে।

তিনি তার মক্কেলকে ব্লেড দিয়ে হাতে একটু আঘাতের সৃষ্টি করতে বললেন ও তাকে চিকিৎসকের কাছে নিয়ে গেলেন। চিকিৎসক ঘুষ খেয়ে সার্টিফিকেট দিলেন যে প্রতিপক্ষ বাদীকে ছুরি দিয়ে আঘাত করেছে। প্রতিপক্ষ যখন জানলো যে তার বিরুদ্ধে ছুরি দিয়ে আঘাত করার মামলা করা হয়েছে তখন সে তার উকিলের কাছে যায়। উকিল তাকে পরামর্শ দেন, এই ক্ষেত্রে তার বক্তব্য হবে যে সে সেদিন ঢাকা শহরেই ছিল না, ময়মনসিংহ শহরে ছিল।

সে মিথ্যা সাক্ষ্য দেয়ার জন্য কয়েকজন ময়মনসিংহবাসীকে ঠিক করার ব্যবস্থা করলো। আদালতে যখন মামলা উঠলো, তখন বাদীপক্ষ দাবি করলো, আসামিপক্ষ একটি ধারালো ছুরি দিয়ে হত্যা করার উদ্দেশ্যে বাদীকে আক্রমণ করেছিল। আর আসামিপক্ষ দাবি করলো যে, ঘটনার দিন সে ঢাকা শহরেই ছিল না, ময়মনসিংহ শহরে ছিল। ময়মনসিংহ শহরের কয়েকজন বাসিন্দা এই বক্তব্যকে সমর্থন করে। দুই পক্ষই মিথ্যা কথা বললো। অথচ ঘটনাটি সম্পূর্ণ ভিন্ন ধরনের। এই পরিস্থিতিতে বিচারকের পক্ষে সত্য এবং মিথ্যার ফারাক করা শক্ত হয়ে দাঁড়ায়।

ড. আকবর আলি খান লিখেন, দুর্ভাগ্যবশত বাংলাদেশে এখনো এই বিচারব্যবস্থাই চলছে, যেখানে বঙ্গবন্ধুর ভাষায় মামলা মিথ্যা দিয়ে শুরু করা হয় আর মিথ্যা দিয়ে শেষ করতে হয়। এ ধরনের বিচারব্যবস্থা শুধু মানুষের অধিকারই ক্ষুণ্ন করছে না, দেশের ভাবমূর্তিও নষ্ট করছে।

২০০৫ সালে বিশ্বব্যাংক বিনিয়োগকারীদের গ্রহণযোগ্যতার ভিত্তিতে বিশ্বের বিভিন্ন দেশের বিচারব্যবস্থার মূল্যায়ন করে। এই মূল্যায়নে দেখা যায় যে ৮৩ শতাংশ বিদেশি বিনিয়োগকারীর বাংলাদেশের বিচারব্যবস্থার ওপর কোনো আস্থা নেই।

২০০৯ সালে বিশ্বব্যাংকের আরেকটি সমীক্ষায় দেখা যায়, যদি কোনো চুক্তি নিয়ে বিবাদ হয়, তাহলে আদালতের মাধ্যমে চুক্তি বলবৎ করতে সারা বিশ্বে গড়ে ৬১৩ দিন লাগে। অথচ বাংলাদেশের ক্ষেত্রে লাগে ১৪৪২ দিন। অর্থাৎ সারা বিশ্বে যে সময় লাগে, তার দ্বিগুণের বেশি সময় লাগে বাংলাদেশে।

বাংলাদেশের ট্রান্সপারেন্সি ইন্টারন্যাশনাল জানাচ্ছে, তাদের সমীক্ষায় দেখা যাচ্ছে যে সমীক্ষাভুক্ত ব্যক্তিদের ৬৬ শতাংশ আদালতের নিচের পর্যায়ে গড়ে ৬১৩৫ টাকা ঘুষ দিয়েছে।

বিশ্বব্যাংকের আইনগত এবং বিচারিক ক্ষমতা বৃদ্ধিসংক্রান্ত প্রকল্পের মূল্যায়ন দলিল থেকে দেখা যাচ্ছে, বাংলাদেশে একটি দেওয়ানি মামলা নিষ্পত্তি হতে ১৫ থেকে ২০ বছর সময় লাগে। আসলে এই সময় আরও অনেক বেশি।
সামগ্রিকভাবে বাংলাদেশে বিচারব্যবস্থা বর্তমানে এক চরম সংকেটর সম্মুখীন।
http://www.mzamin.com/article.php?mzamin=92500