SC extends stay on Hasina’s bail

Trackback URL

Download PDF

The Supreme Court (SC) yesterday adjourned the hearing on government’s appeals against detained former premier Sheikh Hasina till August 26.

A six-member full bench of the SC appellate division, headed by Chief Justice Mohammad Ruhul Amin, yesterday pronounced the adjournment of government’s appeals against Hasina’s bail granted by the High Court (HC) in two separate extortion cases and HC’s stay on operation of an Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) order to Hasina asking her to submit wealth statement

The SC bench also extended its stay order on Hasina’s bail in an extortion case filed by businessmen Azam J Chowdhury till August 26.

Earlier this month, the SC stayed till August 14 the HC’s interim order granting bail to Hasina in the case filed by businessmen Azam J Chowdhury. The SC on August 14 extended its stay order on Hasina’s bail in this case till August 16.

Hearing on government’s appeal against HC’s order granting bail to Abdul Awal Mintoo will also be held on August 26 as the court adjourned hearing of the case for the same period.

Earlier, the SC on August 14 rejected government’s prayer for staying the HC’s August 7 interim orders granting bail to AL chief Sheikh Hasina in an extortion case filed by businessman Noor Ali, and staying operation of the ACC order to Hasina for submitting her wealth statement.

On the same day the SC also rejected a government prayer for staying the HC’s bail order for detained businessman Abdul Awal Mintoo.

A division bench of the HC on August 7 granted bail to Hasina in the case filed by Noor Ali and ordered the government not to have her tried under the Emergency Power Rules, 2007.

The same day, the HC also stayed operation of the ACC order to Hasina for submitting her wealth statement.

Besides, it declared the confinement of former FBCCI president Mintoo illegal and granted him bail.

Earlier on August 9, the government filed appeals with the Chamber Judge’s court of the SC, seeking stay on the HC orders in response to two writ petitions filed by Hasina and one by Mintoo.

Chamber Judge Hasan Ameen heard government’s appeals on August 12 and refrained from giving any orders. He referred the matters for hearing to a regular bench of the SC on August 14. On the same day a SC full bench fixed yesterday for hearing on the cases.

The court sat at 9:25am yesterday with the hearing on the government’s appeal against the HC order regarding the case filed by Azam J Chowdhury. A large number of lawyers were also present at the court. The court continued the hearing till 1:10pm with a half-an-hour break.

During the hearing, Attorney General (AG) Fida M Kamal said the case filed by Azam J Chowdhury was brought under emergency power rules (EPR) correctly as the country is under a state of emergency now.

The state of emergency was imposed considering the necessity of the nation and we are passing a critical time now, he added.

The AG also said the judiciary is not a system out of the state and the caretaker government has assumed the form of an interim government to many extents. Under the present situation, the HC must issue interim orders carefully.

He said the governments in last 15 years were involved in unbridled corruption, which prompted proclamation of the state of emergency. Now the present government is taking effective measures against corruption and it is time to resist it.

The AG also said the restriction regarding applying and granting bail is clearly mentioned in the EPR.

He also said any case of public importance could be taken under EPR. The case is also of public importance as both the former prime minister and her office is accused in the case.

Hasina’s counsel Barrister Rafique-ul Huq said the HC has given interim orders in the extortion cases under its jurisdiction.

He said the case is pending with the HC and it could be moved to the appellate division after hearing in HC is completed.

He also argued how the case is put under EPR without any police report and how the officials concerned came to know and could determine that the case is of public importance.

Rafique also said the government has brought some amendments in the EPR to give people some relief over the issue of getting bail in a case filed under the rules. But if people cannot enjoy the result of the amendment, then it goes against the fundamental spirit for which the amendment is brought.

He said the state is still running in accordance with the constitution. The state of emergency was imposed suspending only some fundamental rights. The state is neither under army rule nor in a state of war.

Rafique said that the constitution is the highest law of the country and there can be no law above it.

Citing two examples from Britain’s Privy Council (1942 and 1980), the defence lawyer said the constitution of a state is above all whether the country is in a state of war or at peace.

He argued that a case put under EPR must have public interest. A case involving two individuals’ interest would not be a case of public importance, he added.

Leave a Reply