The government dropped the idea of making the Supreme Court judges accountable to the legislature through the 15th amendment to the constitution in 2011, considering the time “not convenient” for such provision, said Suranjit Sengupta, who was the co-chair of the parliamentary standing committee on law ministry.
The committee was tasked with making recommendations for changes to the constitution.
Suranjit, now the chairman of the parliamentary standing committee, said the government then had to compromise on restoring article 96 of the constitution.
“Now is the right time to restore article 96 of the charter,” he told reporters yesterday after the meeting of the parliamentary standing committee on law ministry. The 15th amendment to the constitution created one of the toughest political crises in Bangladesh as the BNP-Jamaat alliance launched politics that led to severe violence across the country, demanding scrapping the amendments that binned the provision of the non-party caretaker government from the charter.
“Sparing restoration of original article 96 of the constitution in the 15th amendment was a wrong decision. I told the government about it, but the government did not do so as in democracy, such decision is collective,” he said.
“In democracy, you may need to compromise. Then the government thought that it was not the right time,” he said.
In the first constitution framed in 1972, article 96 stipulated that the legislature would impeach the Supreme Court judges by the two-third majority in parliament for misconduct, abuse of power, violation of charter and incapability.
In the fourth amendment to the constitution in 1975, the authority was given to the president who was made the centre of all powers.
After the assassination of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman on August 15, 1975, Lt Gen Ziaur Rahman, who usurped power on November 7 the same year, through a military order introduced the Supreme Judicial Council to impeach the judges for misconduct, violation of charter and incapability. The chief justice is the chief of the council compromising two other senior judges as the members. The provision is still in place.
The judiciary in 2010 declared the amendments made by Gen Ziaur Rahman illegal, asking the government to restore the original 1972 constitution.
The Awami League formed a special committee to make recommendations for amending the constitution. The judicial service commission and senior lawyers talked against restoration of article 96 of the charter.
The MPs demanded restoration of original article 96 came to the fore as a justice in 2012 observed that Speaker Abdul Hamid, now president of the Republic, committed seditious offence by commenting the judicial in the assembly.
According to the constitution, the MPs enjoy blanket immunity in discussing any issue and no court can take cognisance of the parliamentary proceedings.
The judges comment put the judiciary and the legislature in an apparent conflict. The MPs demanded restoration of original article 96, but the government refrained from doing so.
The January 5 polls formed the 10th parliament in which no practical opposition parties exist. The Jatiya Party is controversial in its dual role as opposition and part of the government.
Requested by the Suranjit’s committee, the Law Commission in April this year came up with the suggestion that the government could restore original article 96 of the constitution to make the judges accountable to the legislature. The government accepted the proposal and the Law Ministry had been making the draft law on the 16th amendment proposal. The bill is likely to be tabled in the upcoming session of parliament.
“We will give special attention to the bill when it will come to our committee for further examination. We will invite the judicial services association, judges, senior laws and other stakeholders while preparing the recommendations,” Suranjit said.
The meeting yesterday discussed the success of the “Mymensingh model” for quick disposal of the cases.
In Mymensingh, 54,000 cases have been disposed of in 33 months, thanks to the better court management and proper utilisation of the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) that was made mandatory in many cases. The government figures show that around 33 lakh cases have been pending in different courts.