Judicial independence in Bangladesh will remain elusive without effective institutional safeguards, transparency, accountability and political restraint, speakers at a seminar in Dhaka said on May 18, warning that constitutional provisions alone cannot ensure an independent judiciary.
The observations came during a seminar titled “The importance of a fully independent judiciary in Bangladesh,” organized by Dhaka Tribune with support from the Royal Norwegian Embassy at Six Seasons Hotel.
Jurists, lawyers, academics, diplomats and civil society representatives attended the event.
Mirza Hassan, adviser at BRAC University’s BIGD, said Bangladesh’s experience with “illiberal democracy” demonstrated the need for “multiple constraints” beyond the traditional separation of powers.
“We don’t trust politicians. We don’t trust anyone. What we trust is constraints, real effective constraints,” he said, referring to debates surrounding the July Charter.
Dr Sazzad Siddiqui of University of Dhaka questioned whether the judiciary was fully prepared for complete independence, stressing the need for professional skills, technological capacity and institutional courage.
Romana Schweiger of UNDP Bangladesh warned that judicial independence should not turn into arbitrary authority, emphasizing transparent and rule-based procedures for appointments, transfers and disciplinary measures.
Speakers also discussed political interference, institutional balance and protections for marginalized communities, including transgender and gender-diverse people.
“Judicial independence is essential for constitutional democracy, yet it must never be mistaken for high‑handedness, arbitrariness, adventurism or overreach. The judiciary, executive and legislature are coordinate and co‑equal organs of the state, and judges must exercise self‑restraint while safeguarding rights through judicial review under Article 102. The judiciary thrives upon public confidence, a trust that cannot be demanded but must be earned. Independence, at its core, is a judge’s mental state.” “Accountability remains just as vital. As former US Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor warned: ‘A judiciary without accountability is likely to lose public trust. A judiciary without independence is no judiciary at all.’ Recent judicial reforms, however, raise concern. The repeal of the Supreme Court Secretariat Ordinance 2025 and the lapse of the Supreme Court Judges Appointment Ordinance 2025 mark regressive steps, ominous signs that do not bode well for the nation. With parts of both ordinances already implemented, including judicial appointments, their repeal has created an anomalous and chaotic situation.” | |
“Despite decades of political commitments and constitutional guarantees, judicial independence in Bangladesh has remained elusive. Article 22 of the Constitution, the Masdar Hossain verdict and BNP’s reform pledges all reflected broad consensus on establishing an independent judiciary secretariat and a transparent system for appointing Supreme Court judges. Like motherhood and apple pie, everyone claims to want judicial independence, yet recent steps tell a different story.” “The repeal of the Supreme Court Secretariat Ordinance 2025 and the lapse of judicial reform ordinances mark a disappointing reversal. The interim government had conducted extensive consultations before introducing these measures, and petitions have already been filed with the Appellate Division seeking protection of the independent Supreme Court secretariat. Expectations were for reforms to move forward; instead, their repeal has created uncertainty and undermined progress toward genuine judicial autonomy.” | |
“Judicial independence in Bangladesh must be understood through both constitutional and international human rights frameworks. Reforms cannot stop at formal structures; they must ensure transparency, accountability and diversity within the judiciary. Bangladesh’s low position in the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index reflects public concern over effectiveness and autonomy, underscoring the need for deeper change.” “Independence cannot be achieved only through ordinances. Courts must demonstrate the capacity to act independently and resist political pressure. Reforming contempt laws, judicial appointments and accountability mechanisms is essential, while political parties, the media and the public must refrain from undermining the judiciary for partisan interests. A judiciary that protects fundamental rights and liberties, not one that delivers decisions based on political expectations, is the standard a democratic society must uphold.” | |
“Judicial independence in Bangladesh rests not only on constitutional provisions but also on the courage and mindset of judges themselves. Landmark rulings such as the 8th Amendment and 16th Amendment cases showed the Supreme Court’s ability to act independently at critical moments in the nation’s history. Independence is ultimately internal, unless judges feel independent, they cannot truly achieve independence.” “Judges must remain accountable to the people rather than governments or political parties. Governments may change, but the judiciary must not; constitutional principles must endure. A transparent appointment process and stronger institutional safeguards are essential to build public trust. Repealed judicial ordinances introduced by the interim government raise concern. Unelected administrations should not create precedents that weaken democratic accountability, and their reversal has left lingering questions about the future of judicial reform.” | |
| “The importance of a fully independent judiciary may sound like a cliché, yet it reflects the prevailing public sentiment in Bangladesh. Judicial independence is a cornerstone of a modern state, and courts must remain free from political or unwanted influence, as they are the last resort for citizens seeking justice and fairness. While many nations struggle to operationalize this principle, reform must remain a continuous process.” “Accountability and responsibility are equally vital, for big power comes with big responsibilities. A judiciary that is independent, professional, and guided by integrity can stand as a strong pillar of the state system. A 21st‑century society must learn to live with such a judiciary for its own betterment.” |
“A fully independent judiciary remains essential for democracy, rule of law and constitutional governance in Bangladesh. Courts must function free from interference by the executive or legislature, ensuring equal legal protection for all citizens and preventing arbitrary arrest, harassment and state‑sponsored abuse of power.” “Judicial independence is constitutionally guaranteed under Articles 22, 94(4) and 116A. Yet concern persists that the repeal of the Supreme Court Secretariat Ordinance 2025 has left the subordinate judiciary dependent on the Law Ministry for administrative and financial matters. Such dependence undermines the very principle of independence and weakens the judiciary’s role as a safeguard of rights.” | |
“Judicial reform in Bangladesh has gained significant public attention over the past 18 months, underscoring the need for a longer‑term plan jointly led by the judiciary and the executive. Consultations across the country with judges, diplomats and legal experts show that the reform agenda was generated from within the judiciary itself and later supported by the executive.” “The United Nations Development Programme has worked with Bangladesh’s judiciary since independence on digitization, capacity building and institutional strengthening. Public awareness now extends well beyond the judiciary, creating momentum that must be translated into a clear path forward. Sustained reforms and broader consultation are essential to ensure judicial independence becomes more than a promise, it becomes a lasting reality.” | |
“Judicial independence in Bangladesh remains incomplete, weakened by flaws in appointments, financial insecurity and fragile institutional capacity. Independence rests on three pillars: fair appointments and job security, financial security, and institutional autonomy. Yet these foundations remain shaky.” “The repeal of the judicial secretariat ordinance is particularly troubling. The High Court had already declared Article 116 unconstitutional and directed the government to establish an independent judicial secretariat. Ignoring that judgment risks contempt and undermines the rule of law. Poor working conditions further erode integrity. Many judges face financial crisis and lack basic logistical support. Asking them to remain honest while paying Tk50,000 a month is not only unrealistic, it is absurd. Without structural reform and adequate resources, judicial independence will remain an aspiration rather than a reality.” | |
“Judicial independence in Bangladesh has remained an unresolved issue for decades despite repeated constitutional promises and political commitments. The repeal of Supreme Court‑related ordinances has left the government without a clear roadmap on how or when reforms will be implemented. The debate has shifted from building an independent judiciary to exploring ways of restraining it through different laws, an unfortunate trend that undermines progress.” “The main obstacle lies in the absence of genuine political commitment. Parties often champion judicial autonomy while in opposition, only to question it once in power. Reversing already settled reforms through prolonged political reconsideration risks weakening the judiciary further and eroding public trust in constitutional governance.” | |
“Judicial independence must be understood as the judiciary’s freedom to deliver judgments based solely on law and justice, free from executive, legislative, financial or external pressures. Public confidence is the true foundation of judicial authority; when independence is compromised, citizens lose faith and democracy is weakened. Bangladesh has repeatedly witnessed the consequences of a politicized judiciary, where erosion of autonomy undermines constitutional governance and democratic stability.” “Reforms are necessary but must remain transparent, consultative and constitutionally consistent. Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny, and rushed reforms without scrutiny or stakeholder input risk destabilizing institutions rather than strengthening them. Judicial reform must balance urgency with due process, ensuring that legislative changes reinforce integrity and safeguard fundamental rights.” | |
“Judicial independence in Bangladesh cannot be understood in isolation from broader political and institutional realities. Public confidence in the judiciary depends heavily on transparency and openness, yet restrictions on media access to court proceedings do little to strengthen that trust. Even in countries like the United States, where judicial transparency is comparatively higher, public confidence has eroded as courts are often perceived as politically influenced.” “In Bangladesh, limited access to court records and weak digital transparency remain significant barriers for journalists and citizens seeking accountability. Technology offers clear opportunities to improve efficiency and openness, but both the state and the judiciary remain hesitant to embrace reform. Sustaining public confidence requires consistency not only in judicial independence but also in the credibility of political commitments. Strengthening trust in both the judiciary and political promises is essential for meaningful democratic governance.” |