BNP on Monday hailed the Supreme Court’s initiative for formulating disciplinary rules for lower court judges. “We welcome the Chief Justice’s initiative relating to the disciplinary rules for lower court judges. We believe justice will be ensured if the judiciary can work independently,” said BNP senior joint secretary general Ruhul Kabir Rizvi.
Speaking at a press briefing at BNP’s Nayapaltan central office, he further said, “But, the government is not allowing the judiciary to work independently only to maintain its control over it. We strongly condemn it.”
Rizvi said, the Supreme Court has taken the move so that common people’ s last resort judiciary can work independently with its own strength. He demanded the government implement the Supreme Court’s directive in this regard. On December 2, 1999, the Supreme Court in the Masdar Hossain case issued a seven-point directive, including formulating separate disciplinary rules for the lower court judges.
On November 24, the Supreme Court gave the government one week to publish a gazette notification on the disciplinary rules for the judicial officers. On December 8, the Supreme Court summoned law and justice division secretary Abu Saleh Sk Md Zahirul Haque and legislative and parliamentary affairs division secretary Mohammad Shahidul Haque of the law ministry to appear before it on Monday (Dec 12) to explain the failure to publish the notification in this regard. Later, on Sunday, the President decided that there was no need for issuing any gazette notification on the drafts of the disciplinary and conduct rules for judicial officers and Bangladesh judicial service rules. However, the Supreme Court today said the President was misled and asked the authorities concerned to issue a gazette notification on the disciplinary and conduct rules for lower court judges by January 5.
Rizvi said, the administration and bureaucrats did not comply with the court order by misleading the President. “We’ll like to say the government is harming the independence of the judiciary only to keep its dominance on it. The Chief Justice has also long been voicing anger over the dual role in the judiciary, interference and the independence of the judiciary.”
