bdnews24.com :
Dr Kamal Hossain does not see any comments that need to be erased from the Appellate Division verdict on the 16th constitutional amendment.
The senior lawyer also does not subscribe to the view that the court can
withdraw the verdict on its own will.
Dr Kamal spoke to bdnews24.com on Sunday amid the government’s anger and a huge debate touched off by the verdict on the amendment that had restored parliament’s powers to sack top court judges.
The lawyer, once an Awami League leader and a former minister of Bangabandhu’s Cabinet, spoke against the amendment as an amicus curiae during the hearing in the Appellate Division.
Some observations made by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha in the verdict have angered Awami League leaders. The verdict has revived the Supreme Judicial Council to sack top court judges on grounds of incompetency and misconduct. Law Minister Anisul Huq said history was ‘distorted’ in the verdict. He also said the government would move to have ‘unacceptable and offensive’ statements in the verdict deleted.
Dr Kamal Hossain told this news agency that he had read the relevant parts of the 799-page three times.
“I didn’t find a single word that can be expunged. There’s nothing in it to expunge,” he said.
Awami League leaders have claimed that the Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman has been belittled in the verdict. Dr Kamal said, “What he (chief justice) said is ‘singular’ as dreamt by Bangabandhu. “What Bangabandhu dreamt is that this country will not belong to a single individual. This is not something being spoken against Bangabandhu. This is Bangabandhu’s word,” he said.
Justice Sinha observed in the verdict, “No nation – no country is made of or by one person. If we want to truly live up to the dream of Sonar Bangla as advocated by our father of the nation, we must keep ourselves free from this suicidal ambition and addiction of ‘I’ness. That only one person or one man did all this and etc.”
Pointing to the critics of the verdict, Gano Forum President Dr Kamal said, “We earned this independence by sacrificing millions of lives. Now the illiterate and dishonest people are trying to make an issue out of it for personal gains.” Lawyers backed by the Awami League have announced protests against the verdict while the pro-BNP lawyers will demonstrate against its criticisms.
The pro-government lawyers demand that the court cancel the verdict on its own volition.
About the demand for rubbing out parts of the verdict, Attorney General Mahbubey Alam told bdnews24.com, “The chief justice can withdraw these on his own will if he wishes to. And the matter can also be brought up in the review petition.” Dr Kamal, however, disagreed. “It can’t be done on his will. They (state) will have to make it clear what parts should be withdrawn and why. There is no provision for withdrawal on one’s own will.” Bur then, he said, there is the scope for seeking a review of the verdict.
“Besides the review petition, a written application be filed to have any comment withdrawn,” he added.
About the allegation of distortion of history, Dr Kamal, one of the members of the panel that drafted Bangladesh’s Constitution in 1972, said the state should be more specific.
“They’ll have to write down the words and point out the page numbers through which they think history has been distorted.”
Dr Kamal Hossain does not see any comments that need to be erased from the Appellate Division verdict on the 16th constitutional amendment.
The senior lawyer also does not subscribe to the view that the court can
withdraw the verdict on its own will.
Dr Kamal spoke to bdnews24.com on Sunday amid the government’s anger and a huge debate touched off by the verdict on the amendment that had restored parliament’s powers to sack top court judges.
The lawyer, once an Awami League leader and a former minister of Bangabandhu’s Cabinet, spoke against the amendment as an amicus curiae during the hearing in the Appellate Division.
Some observations made by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha in the verdict have angered Awami League leaders. The verdict has revived the Supreme Judicial Council to sack top court judges on grounds of incompetency and misconduct. Law Minister Anisul Huq said history was ‘distorted’ in the verdict. He also said the government would move to have ‘unacceptable and offensive’ statements in the verdict deleted.
Dr Kamal Hossain told this news agency that he had read the relevant parts of the 799-page three times.
“I didn’t find a single word that can be expunged. There’s nothing in it to expunge,” he said.
Awami League leaders have claimed that the Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman has been belittled in the verdict. Dr Kamal said, “What he (chief justice) said is ‘singular’ as dreamt by Bangabandhu. “What Bangabandhu dreamt is that this country will not belong to a single individual. This is not something being spoken against Bangabandhu. This is Bangabandhu’s word,” he said.
Justice Sinha observed in the verdict, “No nation – no country is made of or by one person. If we want to truly live up to the dream of Sonar Bangla as advocated by our father of the nation, we must keep ourselves free from this suicidal ambition and addiction of ‘I’ness. That only one person or one man did all this and etc.”
Pointing to the critics of the verdict, Gano Forum President Dr Kamal said, “We earned this independence by sacrificing millions of lives. Now the illiterate and dishonest people are trying to make an issue out of it for personal gains.” Lawyers backed by the Awami League have announced protests against the verdict while the pro-BNP lawyers will demonstrate against its criticisms.
The pro-government lawyers demand that the court cancel the verdict on its own volition.
About the demand for rubbing out parts of the verdict, Attorney General Mahbubey Alam told bdnews24.com, “The chief justice can withdraw these on his own will if he wishes to. And the matter can also be brought up in the review petition.” Dr Kamal, however, disagreed. “It can’t be done on his will. They (state) will have to make it clear what parts should be withdrawn and why. There is no provision for withdrawal on one’s own will.” Bur then, he said, there is the scope for seeking a review of the verdict.
“Besides the review petition, a written application be filed to have any comment withdrawn,” he added.
About the allegation of distortion of history, Dr Kamal, one of the members of the panel that drafted Bangladesh’s Constitution in 1972, said the state should be more specific.
“They’ll have to write down the words and point out the page numbers through which they think history has been distorted.”
