The virtual High Court Bench of Justice Md Ashraful Kamal has made an observation that conducting cases by any lawyer from outside Bangladesh was illegal and unethical. The court also said that there was no scope of filing bail application when staying abroad according to the law and rules in a 112-page order posted in the Supreme Court’s website on Sunday.
The bail application was filed recently by Sikder Group Managing Director Ron Haque Sikder and his brother Dipu Haque Sikder in a case filed on charges of abducting, torturing and threatening to shoot two top officials of Exim Bank over loan permission. Senior lawyer Ajmalul Hossain from London argued in the virtual High Court Bench for bails of two sibling brothers, now staying in Bangkok.
All the circumstances of the case are not known to us. What is clear is his Lordship was annoyed by the way the bail petitions were filed and moved. The lawyer who appeared is not a foreign lawyer and he regularly practices in our courts. But the fault lies with the petitioners. To the petitioners he was a foreign lawyer because he is a QC. The foreign lawyers can appear in any democratic country but some formality has to be observed. In our country Bar Council is the authority to issue such permission.
What any lawyer knows is that for moving a bail petition in any country the presence of the petitioner is a must. He must first submit the petitioner to the jurisdiction of the court to hear his grievance for the protection of law.
So the petitioners should not have advised against the law. The legal profession is a noble profession not a money making business. From the observations of his Lordship it is evident that he emphasised on his unethical behaviour by filing the bail petitions knowingly such petitions were not entertainable. The court’s time was wasted just for a different consideration. Perhaps that was the impression that affected the mind of his Lordship and he did not like it. He knew the petitioners have too much easy money to spend around.
The fact in Bangladesh is that money power is above the law power depending on situations. Those who break the law they do so knowingly that their money power can change the application of law. The abuse of bail power and passing remand orders should be stopped if money power is to be stopped in court proceedings. In lower judiciary this is very much true. To get bail and avoid being sent to police remand how money talks.
The question should be asked is how the petitioners used their planes to cross our borders to go to Bangkok. The money power made it possible. Whatever our Lordships say about the rule of law it is very difficult to convince the general public that for some people living above the law is not their lifestyle.
