UNB, Dhaka :
The High Court on Monday fixed February 26 for delivering its judgment over a writ petition filed challenging the legality of Articles 95 and 116 of the Constitution which allow the President to appoint the Supreme Court judges and control the lower court judges.
An HC bench comprising Justice Quazi Reza-Ul Hoque and Justice Mohammad Ullah fixed the date after hearing a petition.
Earlier, on November 22, the High Court adjourned sine die the delivery of its verdict on the writ.
Supreme Court lawyer Eunus Ali Akond filed the writ petition with the court on November 3.
The petitioner said that the two articles are contradictory to articles 7,22,26,31 and 109 of the Constitution.
The writ was filed following a recent remark by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha
that the article 116 of the existing constitution is one of the main reasons behind the slowness of the judiciary.
According to the writ petition, the petitioner said as per the article 95 (2) of the Constitution, the President will appoint the Chief Justice and recruit other judges in consultation with the Chief Justice.
However, the President is not fully independent as he cannot accomplish all works except the appointment of the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice, without consultation with the Prime Minister, he said.
As per the article 116 of the present constitution, the control (including the power of posting, promotion and grant of leave) and discipline of persons employed in the judicial service and magistrates exercising judicial functions shall vest in the President and shall be exercised by him in consultation with the Supreme Court.
But the Constitution of 1972 stipulates ‘the control and discipline of persons employed in the judicial service was completely exercised by the Supreme Court’.
He said four basic principles-Secularity, Nationalism, Democracy and Socialism-of the original Constitution were reinstated through the 5th Amendment to the Constitution in 2011. However, the article 116 of the 1972 Constitution was not restored.
The High Court on Monday fixed February 26 for delivering its judgment over a writ petition filed challenging the legality of Articles 95 and 116 of the Constitution which allow the President to appoint the Supreme Court judges and control the lower court judges.
An HC bench comprising Justice Quazi Reza-Ul Hoque and Justice Mohammad Ullah fixed the date after hearing a petition.
Earlier, on November 22, the High Court adjourned sine die the delivery of its verdict on the writ.
Supreme Court lawyer Eunus Ali Akond filed the writ petition with the court on November 3.
The petitioner said that the two articles are contradictory to articles 7,22,26,31 and 109 of the Constitution.
The writ was filed following a recent remark by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha
that the article 116 of the existing constitution is one of the main reasons behind the slowness of the judiciary.
According to the writ petition, the petitioner said as per the article 95 (2) of the Constitution, the President will appoint the Chief Justice and recruit other judges in consultation with the Chief Justice.
However, the President is not fully independent as he cannot accomplish all works except the appointment of the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice, without consultation with the Prime Minister, he said.
As per the article 116 of the present constitution, the control (including the power of posting, promotion and grant of leave) and discipline of persons employed in the judicial service and magistrates exercising judicial functions shall vest in the President and shall be exercised by him in consultation with the Supreme Court.
But the Constitution of 1972 stipulates ‘the control and discipline of persons employed in the judicial service was completely exercised by the Supreme Court’.
He said four basic principles-Secularity, Nationalism, Democracy and Socialism-of the original Constitution were reinstated through the 5th Amendment to the Constitution in 2011. However, the article 116 of the 1972 Constitution was not restored.
