Bangladesh News

The Supreme Court (SC) yesterday stayed for three weeks the High Court (HC) judgment that directed the government to reappoint with seniority 10 additional judges not confirmed during the BNP-Jamaat coalition government’s rule.

A five-member full bench of the Appellate Division headed by Chief Justice MM Ruhul Amin passed the order following two petitions filed by the government and another by 19 HC judges.

The apex court asked the petitioners to file regular appeals with it within this time.

It also permitted advocate Ashraf-uz Zaman, a pro-Jamaat-e-Islami lawyer, to file a leave to appeal as public interest appeal with the SC against the HC verdict following his application dated July 23.

Moving the government petitions, Attorney General Salauddin Ahmed yesterday told the court that the government filed the appeals as the HC judgment is related with constitutional matters that should be settled in the Appellate Division.

“The maters as to whether the High Court can direct the president or the government to appoint judges and whether complying with the chief justice’s recommendations in appointing judges are mandatory for the government or the president should be settled in the Appellate Division,” he said.

If the government reappoints the 10 judges with seniority in the HC division in line with the HC directives and then it is proved in the Appellate Division that the judgment was erroneous, the judiciary might face a serious crisis, he argued.

Salauddin Ahmed said there had been rules in the constitution for the president’s consulting with the chief justice regarding appointment of judges in the higher judiciary but those rules were repealed later.

“Specific directions from the Appellate Division are needed to settle the disputes over the issue of superseding while appointing judges,” he said, praying to the apex court to stay the operation of the HC judgment.

Referring to the absence of rules for the president’s consulting with the chief justice for appointing judges in the current constitution, Advocate TH Khan, counsel for the 19 HC judges, said, “If the 10 judges are reappointed with seniority, my clients will be superseded.”

On February 4, 2003, 10 unconfirmed additional judges of the HC division filed two writ petitions with the HC, challenging the legality of the government’s not confirming their jobs in spite of the chief justice’s positive recommendations.

Dr Kamal Hossain, who moved for the writ petitioners, said the government should comply with the recommendations of the chief justice in appointing judges in the higher judiciary to keep the judges united.

Barrister M Amir-ul Islam argued that the government filed appeals with the SC against the HC judgment but it had not replied to the HC rules during the proceedings of the writ petitions.

“A long time was wasted in disposing of the writ petitions in the High Court and the 10 judges of the High Court were deprived due to that delay. The appeals were filed against the High Court judgment in order to delay further the reappointments of the deprived judges,” he said.

Upon the two writ petitions, a three-member special bench of the HC on July 17 declared illegal and unconstitutional the non-confirmation by the BNP-led government of the services of 10 additional HC judges appointed during the rule of the Awami League despite the chief justice’s positive recommendations.

The HC bench comprised of justices Mohammad Abdur Rashid, SK Sinha and Nazmun Ara Sultana also directed the government to reappoint the 10 judges with seniority within one month.

On July 24, the government filed two leaves to appeal with the SC to vacate the HC verdict.

Nineteen HC judges including justices Syed Mohammad Dastagir Husain, Mir Hasmat Ali, Abdul Awal, Sharif Uddin Chaklader, Md Mizanur Rahman Bhuiyan, Syed AB Mahmudul Huq, Salma Masud Chowdhury, AFM Abdur Rahman, Farid Ahmed, Md Abu Tariq, Muhammad Abdul Hafiz and Syed Refaat Ahmed filed an application with the SC on July 27 against the HC judgment.