bdnews24.com :
The High Court verdict declaring illegal the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, which had restored Parliament’s power to impeach top judges, has been published.
The 165-page verdict written by Justice Moyeenul Islam Chowdhury was uploaded on the Supreme Court website on Thursday. On May 5, the special bench of justices Chowdhury, Quazi Reza-Ul Hoque and Md Ashraful Kamal passed the order by a majority over a petition by nine lawyers challenging the validity of the amendment.
Justice Chowdhury and Justice Hoque had agreed that the amendment was illegal. Their verdict was published on Thursday, Deputy Attorney General Motahar Hossain Saju told bdnews24.com.
However, Justice Kamal was for dismissing the petition. His version is yet to be published, Saju added.
The State on May 8 moved the Appellate Division to reverse the High Court ruling.
Saju said the matter will be presented before the Supreme Court’s chamber judge after the full verdict (including Justice Kamal’s version) is published. The verdict read, “…we have no
hesitation in holding that the Sixteenth Amendment is a colourable legislation and is violative of the principle of separation of powers among the three organs of the State, namely, the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary and the Independence of the Judiciary as guaranteed by Articles 94 (4) and 147 (2), two basic structures of the Constitution and the same is also hit by Article 7B of the Constitution.”
“So we find merit in the Rule. The Rule, therefore, succeeds. Accordingly, by majority view, the Rule is made absolute without any order as to costs.
“It is hereby declared that the Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 2014 (Act No. 13 of 2014) (Annexure-‘A’ to the Writ Petition) is colourable, void and ultra vires the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.”
The ruling had drawn a sharp reaction. Opposition MPs had walked out of the legislative assembly in protest at the verdict. Law Minister Anisul Huq at the time described it as ‘unconstitutional’. He also said that the verdict would be overturned if challenged in the Appellate Division.
The High Court verdict declaring illegal the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, which had restored Parliament’s power to impeach top judges, has been published.
The 165-page verdict written by Justice Moyeenul Islam Chowdhury was uploaded on the Supreme Court website on Thursday. On May 5, the special bench of justices Chowdhury, Quazi Reza-Ul Hoque and Md Ashraful Kamal passed the order by a majority over a petition by nine lawyers challenging the validity of the amendment.
Justice Chowdhury and Justice Hoque had agreed that the amendment was illegal. Their verdict was published on Thursday, Deputy Attorney General Motahar Hossain Saju told bdnews24.com.
However, Justice Kamal was for dismissing the petition. His version is yet to be published, Saju added.
The State on May 8 moved the Appellate Division to reverse the High Court ruling.
Saju said the matter will be presented before the Supreme Court’s chamber judge after the full verdict (including Justice Kamal’s version) is published. The verdict read, “…we have no
hesitation in holding that the Sixteenth Amendment is a colourable legislation and is violative of the principle of separation of powers among the three organs of the State, namely, the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary and the Independence of the Judiciary as guaranteed by Articles 94 (4) and 147 (2), two basic structures of the Constitution and the same is also hit by Article 7B of the Constitution.”
“So we find merit in the Rule. The Rule, therefore, succeeds. Accordingly, by majority view, the Rule is made absolute without any order as to costs.
“It is hereby declared that the Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 2014 (Act No. 13 of 2014) (Annexure-‘A’ to the Writ Petition) is colourable, void and ultra vires the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.”
The ruling had drawn a sharp reaction. Opposition MPs had walked out of the legislative assembly in protest at the verdict. Law Minister Anisul Huq at the time described it as ‘unconstitutional’. He also said that the verdict would be overturned if challenged in the Appellate Division.
