Should UP chairmen hold degrees?
The High Court on Wednesday issue.d a rule asking why candidates for Union Parishad chairman elections should not be required to hold at least a bachelor’s degree.
A bench comprising Justice Ahmed Sohel and Justice Fatema Anwar issued the rule after a preliminary hearing on a writ petition filed by Supreme Court lawyers Kazi Ferdousul Hasan and Md Tanvir Ahmed Khan.
The court asked the authorities to explain why they should not introduce a minimum bachelor’s degree requirement for candidates contesting Union Parishad chairman elections.
It also questioned why Section 26 of the Local Government (Union Parishad) Act, 2009, should not be declared inconsistent with the Constitution, as the provision does not set any educational qualification for the post.
The High Court’s rule does not immediately change the existing law. The court has only sought explanations from the government and the Election Commission.
Candidates can therefore continue to contest Union Parishad chairman elections under the current rules until the court delivers a final judgment or the government amends the law.
The court directed the secretaries of the Local Government Division and the Ministry of Law, as well as the chief election commissioner, to respond to the rule.
Petitioner Kazi Ferdousul Hasan said Union Parishad chairmen exercise significant administrative and judicial powers, including presiding over village courts.
He said a chairman can hear and dispose of certain cases involving claims of up to Tk 300,000. In comparison, a magistrate exercising similar judicial authority must hold at least a bachelor’s degree and pass the Bangladesh Judicial Service Commission examination.
However, the existing law does not require a Union Parishad chairman candidate to have any educational qualification.
The petitioners therefore challenged Section 26 of the Union Parishad Act and sought a court directive making a bachelor’s degree the minimum educational qualification for the post.
The respondents will now submit their explanations before the High Court. After reviewing their arguments, the court may discharge the rule, issue directions or declare the relevant legal provision unconstitutional.
