jump to navigation

Judgement on Caretaker Government and Crisis in Politics September 18, 2012

Posted by bdoza in BANGLADESH, POLITICS.
Tags: ,
1 comment so far

Ex-Supreme Court Chief Justice revealed his full judgement after 16 months of disclosing initial report on the caretaker government. The judgement expressed explicitly against caretaker government.

To come to the judgement, the Supreme Court also taken the opinion of 11 Emirates Curie, 10 of whom advised for the continuation of caretaker government. The High Court also in its judges supported the caretaker government. 4 of the 7 judges were in favour and 3 against the verdict.

The experts and lawyers are expressing their mixed reaction to the judgment. A major complain against the judgment that supreme court tried to solve a political issue in the court. The other complain is that the ex-CJ served the purpose of a political government. A citizen in TV complained that the verdict will divide the nation. An opposition leader predicted the CJ will be condemned in the coming history for the act.

The opposition is pressing for next elections under caretaker government. They straight forward rejected the judgment and announce protest against the judgement. They declared that the election will occur only under caretaker government, they will resist any attempt of election under the political government.

To general public, the general election is a very important event. The people of Bangladesh are politically very conscious people. To cast their their vote freely and fairly is very important. They know that they get only a single chance to reshape their fate after every five years.

They are supposed not to accept any attempt from any quarter that will bleak their chance of free choice.

An ordinary citizen

Care Taker Government and Supreme Court Judgment May 23, 2011

Tags: , ,
add a comment

Supreme court in a judgment declared caretaker system illegal in Bangladesh. It is to be noted that Bagladesg has introduced caretaker government system to hold national elections under a politically neutral tenvironment. The care taker government instituted for 3 months following the tenure of the elected government is over and headed by the immediate past chief justice. A group of advisers among the non-political personalities from the professionals are selected to support him. The CTG is basically assigned to hold the general election and to maintain the general administration. They are nor empowered to formulate any major rules and regulations and will not change the constitution,

Bangladesh virtually hold 4 national elections under the CTG and all of them were accepted by the people as fair and neutral. In the history of Bangladesh, these elections are best of its kind.

But to influence the composition of the ctg with an aim to influence the result of the ellection, the elected governments had tried in the past to promote their loyal judges to the post of Chief Justice, superceeding the seniors. This attempt has been made in 2001 and 2006 . In 2001, the cj didn’t fulfil the wish of his mentors.In 2006 , the oppostion to the manuever lead to the formation of a caretaker government headed by the president, who later had to handover the charge to a new set of advisers led by Dr. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed. This Ctg stays in power for long 2 years and tried to reform the political system but at last left the scene by holding an election in December 2008 in which AL gained a landslide victory.

Controversy arises on the tenure of the ctg and the manipulation of the promotion of the judges ? .

Supreme Court took the opinion of the Amicus Curiae. Most of the americus queri except one gave opinion in favour of CTG. Citizens groups also favour caretaker goverment.

8NP expreesed its opposition to any move form the concept of caretaker government. Ershad hails the idea. Jammat is not in a postion to say anything on the issue. Their top brasses are in the jail on the charge for crimes committed during the liberation war.

The issue will be discussed in the parliament. The motive of AL is not yet clear whether they will prefer a caretaker government or switch over to other form. The judgment of the supreme court open up the dual opportunity for them. They are tatking time to come to a conclusion.I am also suspecting that they will linger the discussion close to the end of their term and on the political reading at the last moment they will come to a decision.

People still would prefer an elelction under CTG. The alternative is an election under an independent election commission. But political government does not yet able to develop the confidence to conduct an independent election under an election commission.

Any attempt by the government to manipulate the result will bring no good to the government.

An ordinary citizen

The case of Sotomayor: Judging a Judge July 31, 2009

Posted by bdoza in BANGLADESH, JUDICIARY.
Tags: , ,
1 comment so far

SotomayorWhen a seat was vacant in the Supreme Court of USA, after a period of speculation for many, President OBama proposed Judge Sonia Sotomayor as his candidate to fill up the vacant post of retiring Justice David Souter. Soymoto is an Hispanic American working as federal appellate judge Few speculated her name but Obama thought to nominate one who ‘would bring more experience on the bench than anyone currently serving on the Supreme Court’.

Immedaiately MEDIA started to scrutinise her past as a Judge and as a person. Her background has been revealed. Her judgements have been reviwed. Even her speeches at public functions were critically analysed.

Many speak out against her for her judgements, against her attitude.blame her for racism, doubt on her integrity and intellect. She tried to defend her, explained her position and clarified the ambiguity.

Along the process, she had to face the Sente JUdiciary Committee where she had to face quesstions from every angle one can imagine. The Committee appproved the nomination on majority votes.

The final passage would be in the Senate where she gets the approval, she will be the first Hispanic American Justice in the history of America.

In Bangladesh, the appointment is more a secret process. The President has the constitutional power to appoint the judges of the Supreme Court with the consent of the Prime Minister from the sitting judges of the High Court or the advocates of the Judiciary. No public srutiny, no interoggation by the parliamentary committee or voting in the parliament are necessary.

Does the selection process in Bangladesh for judges in the Supreme Court need more screening by the people and parliament?

An ordinary citizen

Sotomayor OK’d for Supreme Court

Judgement on hartal by Supreme Court and political consensus December 4, 2007

Tags: , ,
add a comment

[Personal thoughts] The Daily Star reports that the Supreme Court yesterday overruled a High Court judgment and set aside its order that violence and coercion for or against hartal constitute criminal activities.A seven-member full court of the Appellate Division, headed by Chief Justice M Ruhul Amin, passed the order following an appeal filed by Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan while he was secretary general of BNP.

A High Court division bench, in a suo moto rule on May 13 in 1999, affirmed that violence and coercion for or against hartal constitute criminal activities and directed police and court to take appropriate action in this regard.

The decision of the Supreme Court upheld hartal as the democratic right of the people. But the contents in the judgment that ‘it set aside violence and coercion for or against the hartal constitutes criminal activities’ was a little bit confusing to the ordinary citizen.

None wants violence or coercion for or against the hartal in our country and our hartals were becoming nastier as the time passes with the increase in violence or coercion. Before 1/11, it took the nastiest form by so called ‘aborod’ when all the traffic through roads and rails were forcibly cut off days after days and common people’s suffering rose to sky high to achieve the so called political objectives of parties and the clash, killing and violence on the 28thOctober 2006 on the streets of

Dhaka immediately after the handover of power of the BNP regime is beyond one’s imagination. Both the parties involved in the clash filed cases but so far no progress of the cases has been made. The ordinary citizen feels that these cases should be disposed off early and means should be adopted to discourage such political violence in future.

Though hartal is a democratic right, one cannot permit violence or coercion in favour or against the hartal. Supreme Court is also not advocating these in any way. As there are laws to punish these crimes in our legal system, it only set aside the order of that particular case of 1999 by the high court.

Then question comes, why there is no penalty or punishment for violence or coercion or even killing in regard to hartal or other political programs? Why the law is not effectively working in this respect?

The ordinary citizen is not against hartal but that should be as a last resort, on national issues, not for petty political gains, by spontaneous participation of the people and shouldn’t be imposed by force or violence.

And the political parties should come to a consensus for not calling hartal unnecessary and on petty issues and will never resort to violence to impose it. Hartal affects the ordinary citizen most, takes away their livelihood apart from its affection to social life and economic development of the country.

An ordinary citizen

‘Supreme Court will play role in national crisis’ August 13, 2007

Posted by bdoza in BANGLADESH, JUDICIARY, Separation of Judiciary.
Tags: ,
add a comment


Chief Justice said that SC played a role in the past as at the critical juncture of the nation. It is doing so at present and will do so in future to pull the nation out of mire”. He was commenting in a seminar on ‘Reform and Freedom of Judiciary’ organized by ‘Human Rights and Peace for Bangladesh’


Our nation is passing through a difficult period. Our experiment with democracy has tumbled on itself. Our beloved leaders could not hold election by themselves. Many of them are under arrest and some of them are already given charge sheet. Many of them are again challenging the verdict of the special tribunal in the High Court. That is again counter appealed.

The fate of the country will ultimately is going to depend on the judgments of the High Ccourt and ultimately Supreme court.

Many are questioning the procedures, many are questioning the merit of the accusations and many are questioning the prudence of the judgments. In this crisscross of opinions ultimately the issues will be referred to the Supreme Court.

Will supreme Court be able to play the role? It is a matter not only of chief Justice, it is a collective matter. Where our recruitment system of Judges is not perfect how can we be so sure? Is there any one who may remain obliged to his recruiting boss?

Most important of all, is the Judiciary going to be separated to be independent enough to give judgments on critical issues without fear or faour?