Economic Reporter :
The Supreme Court’s Appellate Division will decide whether garment exporters’ organisation BGMEA will receive more time to demolish the illegally constructed 16-storey building in the Hatirjheel industrial area in Dhaka.
A four-member bench led by Chief Justice Syed Mahmud Hossain heard a petition for more time on Sunday and set Tuesday for the date of the decision.
Lawyers Kamrul Haque Siddique and Imtiaz Moinul Islam represented the BGMEA at the hearing, while the state was represented by Attorney General Mahbubey Alam.
Built illegally on endangered wetlands in Dhaka about two decades ago, the BGMEA building was called ‘a cancer’ on the Hatirjheel Beautification Project by the High Court.
In 2011, the High Court found that the building had been constructed by violating the law meant to protect wetlands and ordered its demolition. The court said the building was hindering the water flow of Begunbari canal and hampering the Hatirjheel project.
A review petition on the decision was dismissed by the Appellate Division and the BGMEA were told to complete demolitions by Sept 12. An additional seven-month extension granted on Oct 8 ends on Apr 12.
The court told the BGMEA at the extension hearing that more time would not be granted.
But the BGMEA filed another petition on Mar 5 asking for an extra year’s extension.
At Saturday’s hearing, the chief justice expressed his annoyance at the BGMEA’s actions, while representative Kamrul Haque Siddique attempted to defend them.
Asked why the organisation should receive more time, Kamrul said that it was trying to complete the work.
“It’s up to you to decide how you will do it,” the chief justice said. “But it [the building] is illegal. It is not our headache how you get it done.”
Kamrul said that the BGMEA had been unable to procure sufficient space in Dhaka, leading to the delay.
“We can submit a filing on the building within a month,” he said.
The chief justice then asked after the dates of the High Court decision, the appeal and review.
“And you are still delaying past this year,” he said after learning the dates. “What is the point of the decision, then?”
The Supreme Court’s Appellate Division will decide whether garment exporters’ organisation BGMEA will receive more time to demolish the illegally constructed 16-storey building in the Hatirjheel industrial area in Dhaka.
A four-member bench led by Chief Justice Syed Mahmud Hossain heard a petition for more time on Sunday and set Tuesday for the date of the decision.
Lawyers Kamrul Haque Siddique and Imtiaz Moinul Islam represented the BGMEA at the hearing, while the state was represented by Attorney General Mahbubey Alam.
Built illegally on endangered wetlands in Dhaka about two decades ago, the BGMEA building was called ‘a cancer’ on the Hatirjheel Beautification Project by the High Court.
In 2011, the High Court found that the building had been constructed by violating the law meant to protect wetlands and ordered its demolition. The court said the building was hindering the water flow of Begunbari canal and hampering the Hatirjheel project.
A review petition on the decision was dismissed by the Appellate Division and the BGMEA were told to complete demolitions by Sept 12. An additional seven-month extension granted on Oct 8 ends on Apr 12.
The court told the BGMEA at the extension hearing that more time would not be granted.
But the BGMEA filed another petition on Mar 5 asking for an extra year’s extension.
At Saturday’s hearing, the chief justice expressed his annoyance at the BGMEA’s actions, while representative Kamrul Haque Siddique attempted to defend them.
Asked why the organisation should receive more time, Kamrul said that it was trying to complete the work.
“It’s up to you to decide how you will do it,” the chief justice said. “But it [the building] is illegal. It is not our headache how you get it done.”
Kamrul said that the BGMEA had been unable to procure sufficient space in Dhaka, leading to the delay.
“We can submit a filing on the building within a month,” he said.
The chief justice then asked after the dates of the High Court decision, the appeal and review.
“And you are still delaying past this year,” he said after learning the dates. “What is the point of the decision, then?”
