The High Court has issued a rule asking why a directive should not be given to disclose the list of individuals whose sentences were pardoned by the Presidents in office over the past 33 years.
The rule was issued on Monday by a High Court bench comprising Justice Kazi Zinat Hoque and Justice Aynun Nahar Siddiqua following a hearing on a writ petition.
Barrister Omar Faruk appeared for the petitioner during the hearing.
Earlier, Supreme Court lawyer Omar Faruk had served a legal notice seeking information on the number of individuals whose sentences were suspended or pardoned by the president under Article 49 of the Constitution from 1991 to July 31 of this year.
The notice was sent to the cabinet secretary, the home secretary, and the secretary of the Public Division of the President’s Office.
It requested the list be disclosed within 15 days and raised concerns about the lack of transparency in the exercise of presidential clemency powers.
The notice stated that the public has the right to know how such decisions are made, through what process, and based on whose recommendations or lobbying notorious, infamous, and convicted criminals are granted pardons.
The notice further mentioned that over the years, several individuals convicted in murder and other serious criminal cases have received presidential clemency. Some of these individuals, after being released, reportedly resumed criminal activities, instilling fear in society as mafia dons.
It emphasized the need for clarity on the criteria and process used by the president to pardon convicts. As the concerned authorities did not respond to the legal notice, Barrister Faruk proceeded to file the writ petition with the High Court.
