All-Party Unity Council formed to save judiciary

Staff Reporter : The lawyers of the Supreme Court have taken strong position against the government’s much-talked-about move to re-empower Parliament to remove the SC judges through the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. They at a discussion meeting in the city on Tuesday said that the amendment to the Constitution in supersonic way would be unconstitutional. It will jeopardise the independence of the judiciary, they added. Bangladesh Ganotantrik Ainjibi Samity arranged the discussion, titled “Independent Judiciary, Judge Appointment Process, Judges’ Accountability and Impeachment” at the auditorium of the Supreme Court Bar Association. In the meeting, the senior lawyers of the apex court urged all, particularly the lawyer community, to unite, irrespective their party affiliation, under a platform to raise voice against the crucial issue. They placed a proposal for forming an all-party action committee to protest against the government’s move, and the present lawyers responded to the urge. Later, the committee was formed with Dr Kamal Hossain, who played a vital role in drafting Bangladesh’s first Constitution, as head (convener) of the committee namely ‘Committee to Protect the Independence of the Judiciary’. Senior legal experts Barrister M Amir-Ul Islam, Barrister Mainul Hosein, Advocate Khandker Mahbub Hossain, Barrister Rokanuddin Mahmud and Dr Shahdeen Malik were made joint conveners, while Barrister AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon and Advocate Subrata Chowdhury were made member secretary and assistant member secretary respectively. Vice Chairman of Bangladesh Bar Council Advocate Khandker Mahbub Hossain made the official announcement at the end of the meeting. He is also the president of Supreme Court Bar Association. The members of the committee spoke in the discussion with president of Ganotantrik Ainjibi Samity Advocate Subrata Chowdhury in the chair. General Secretary of the Samity Md Zahidul Bari delivered the welcome speech while its organising secretary M Helaluddin conducted the meeting. All the speakers said that the government’s move would create adverse impacts on the judiciary, which will ultimately affect the democracy as well as the country. They vowed to continue movement against the move until the government meets their demand. On Sunday, Law Minister Anisul Huq tabled the 16th Constitution Amendment Bill before the Parliament. The Speaker forwarded the Bill to the Parliamentary Standing Committee for Law, and the Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Ministry for vetting.In his speech, Dr Kamal Hossain said that it would be unconstitutional if the government amends the Constitution in a supersonic speed. Although the Parliament has the right to amend the Constitution, it can’t do anything that would be unconstitutional. The Parliament is not beyond the Constitution. It has to follow the Constitution, he added. He also said, “There was example in Bangladesh that the Parliament played unconstitutional role taking the advantage of the absolute majority. The current Parliament has two-third majority. So it also may walk towards the unconstitutional way.”  Saying that the move of the government will jeopardise the independence of the judiciary, he called upon the government not to pass the bill without proper consultation with the concerned quarters. The decision in this regard should be taken only after proper consultation, he said. Public opinion should be solicited. Any amendment to the Constitution should be brought on the basis of consensus, he added.The eminent lawyer also said that there are faults in the preamble of the bill as well as in the whole bill. Those who prepared the draft of the bill they are misguiding the people through providing misinformation. Although the government has been saying that they are restoring the provision of the 1972 Constitution, the draft bill has no similarity with that Constitution, said the framer of the 1972 Constitution.He said that an inquiry committee should be formed to investigate the matter. He said the word ‘impeachment’ is only applicable for removal of President from office in case of violation of the Constitution or any grave misconduct. The provision was not in the 1972 Constitution, but the draft bill was placed to impeach the judges. He further said that the question arises as to why an amendment is suddenly required without any discussion or debate, or evaluation of the US, British and Indian experience. Amir-Ul Islam : Barrister M Amir-Ul Islam also stressed on forming consultation body in this regard. No action has been taken on this matter. Instead, suddenly a bill is being introduced to amend provisions with regard to removal of judges. It is unexpected, he said. He further said that the independence of the judiciary is a basic pillar of the Constitution. We have to follow the Constitution. If it is needed to do anything, it has to be done according to the Constitution, he said. Mainul Hosein : Barrister Mainul Hosein in his speech said that “We must get united to uphold the democratic values for which our people fought the Liberation War”. Saying that the judges of the Supreme Court are collectively the protector of the Constitution, so the cause of independence of the judiciary should be their collective cause also. He suggested that the leaders of legal profession should meet the Chief Justice also to let him know our anxiety. He again reiterated his anxiety that the country is being led second time for imposing one party rule and the election’s legitimacy has to be questioned because the attack on independence of the judiciary and the press freedom is part of the same blueprint. An unelected or disputed parliament has no right to amend the Constitution or seek to try the judges of the Supreme Court. Khandker Mahbub Hossain : Advocate Khandker Mahbub Hossain said the government has taken the move to empower an unelected and unrepresentative Parliament to remove judges only to cling to power by re-establishing one-party BAKSAL rule. People won’t accept the decision, as it will put the country at stake, he said. He said that there would be no justice in the country if the Parliament gets back power to sack judges. Rokanuddin Mahmud: Barrister Rokanuddin Mahmud said that the Constitution of 1972 says removal of judges, not to impeach them. If the Parliament will get power of impeachment, the MPs will be the employers of the SC judges. It will push the court towards the politicisation, he said. Shahdeen Malik: Dr Shahdeen Malik said that the words ‘proved misconduct and incapacity’ were in the 1972 Constitution, but the drafted bill has no the word ‘proved’ although the government said that they are restoring the provision of 1972. He also pointed out some other dissimilarities of the bill. Mahbub Uddin Khokon: AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon, secretary of Supreme Court Bar Association, said that if the amendment bill is passed, all the achievements of the country will be ruined. The last nail will be put on the coffin of the democracy though the amendment. So the move of the government has to be resisted.  Subrata Chowdhury: Subrata Chowdhury said that the attack on the judiciary also came in the past. “We resisted the attack with united efforts. If we remain united in the present time, the ill motive of the present government also can be resisted,” he said.