The High Court yesterday issued a rule asking the government and political parties to explain why blockade and hartal should not be declared unconstitutional and void.
In its series of rules upon a writ petition, the High Court division bench also asked the government to explain why its inaction to impose legal restrictions on blockade and hartal should not be declared unlawful.
Four business bodies FBCCI, BGMEA, Bangladesh Knitwear Manufacturers and Exporters Association and Bangladesh Textile Mills Association (BTMA) – filed the writ petition in the form of public interest litigation (PIL) seeking to make illegal the nationwide indefinite transport blockade and hartal enforced by BNP-Jamaat alliance to realise their political demands and asking compensation for the losses incurred due to blockade and hartal since January 6.
In the face of the court’s stance, the counsel for the business bodies dropped the word PIL during the admissibility hearing on the writ petition.
In its rules, the High Court further asked the respondent-political parties to explain why calling hartal without notice with a reasonable time should not be declared illegal and why they should not be held responsible for incurring losses due to blockade and hartal.
Besides, the High Court asked the government and the political parties to explain why it should not be directed to compensate the business bodies that have suffered financial losses due to blockade and hartal.
In addition, the High Court asked the respondents to explain why directive should not be given to prevent the media from publishing, airing or telecasting the news about the announcement of blockade-hartal programmes.
Moreover, the High Court asked the respondents to explain why the aggrieved people suffer from blockade and hartal be allowed to invoke before the High Court for remedy.
In all 48 people, including the government, its Home, Finance and Information Secretaries, Bangladesh Bank Governor, political parties registered under the Election Commission, including ruling AL and, BNP have been made respondents to the case.
The rules were made returnable in four weeks, said the High Court orders.
Advocates Quamrul Huq Siddique and Imtiaz Moinul Islam appeared for the writ petitioners while deputy attorney general Tapas K Biswas stood for the government.
