Staff Reporter :
The High Court (HC) has fixed Tuesday to deliver its verdict on a writ petition filed challenging the legality of Articles 95 and 116 of the Constitution.
A HC bench of Justice Quazi Reza-Ul Hoque and Justice Mohammad Ullah set the date after concluding of the hearing on Monday.
On November 3, Supreme Court Lawyer Eunus Ali Akond filed the petition with the court.
Article 95 of the Constitution has empowered the President to appoint SC judges in consultation with the Chief Justice and Article 116 has allowed the President to give appointment of lower court judges and to promote them and granting their leave, he said in the petition.
The petitioner also said that the two Articles are contradictory with Articles 7, 22, 26, 31 and 109 of the Constitution. Eunus in the petition prayed to the HC to declare those provisions unconstitutional.
Article 95 (1) of the Constitution says, “The Chief Justice shall be appointed by the President and the other Judges shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice.”
Article 116 says, “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 on the President and shall be exercised by him in consultation with the Supreme Court.”
Citing from the writ petition, Eunus earlier said that the President Acts on advice from the Prime Minister under Article 48(3) of the constitution and therefore, the President is not independent.
He added the judiciary is independent under Article 22, 94(4) and 116A of the constitution and in the light of SC judgment in Masdar Hossain case.
So the SC should be vested with the authority to appoint the SC judges and to control the lower court judges, under the Constitution, he said.
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.
Speaker, Law Secretary, Cabinet Secretary and Supreme Court’s Registrar General were made respondents in the petition.
