Members of both the treasury and opposition benches on Sunday harshly criticised the Supreme Court (SC) verdict that upheld the High Court judgment declaring the 16th Amendment to the Constitution illegal.
They also came down heavily on amici curiae, including Dr Kamal Hossain and Barrister M Amir-ul Islam, appointed by the apex court, for placing ‘untrue statements’ before the court over the issue.
The MPs alleged that an attempt is on to create division between the judiciary and the government, saying the verdict came as part of the conspiracy.
They also hoped that the apex court will reconsider its judgment when the review petition is filed in this regard.
Jasod MP Moin Uddin Khan Badal initiated the debate taking floor in the House chaired by Speaker Dr Shirin Sharmin Chaudhury after the Maghrib recess. Commerce Minister Tofail Ahmed, Agriculture Minister Matia Chowdhury, Information Minister Hasanul Haq Inu, Civil Aviation and Tourism Minister Rashed Khan Menon, Jatiya Party MP Ziauddin Ahmed (Bablu), Awami League MP Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim and Prof Ali Ashraf, Independent MP Rustum Ali Faraji and BNF MP SM Abul Kamal Azad joined the debate.
Tofail Ahmed said people are sources of all power and this Parliament is formed with their mandate. “The Cabinet is liable to Parliament. We even can impeach the President, but can’t do so in the case of a particular area (judiciary).”
Mentioning that the court had annulled the 5th amendment to the Constitution, he questioned how the Supreme Judicial Council, which was introduced by military ruler Ziaur Rahman, can prevail?
Tofail harshly criticised the amici curiae, saying they placed untrue statement before the court over the issue. “There is no single shred of truth in their statements,” he said mentioning the names of Dr Kamal Hossain and Barrister Amir-ul Islam.
“We’ve no word to condemn those who advocated for scrapping the 16th Amendment. Their remarks don’t match with what they had said in 1972. They are now very opportunists,” he added.
Terming the SC verdict ‘a premature judgment’, Inu said the court could have passed the verdict after enactment of a law for the removal of justices in line of the 16th Amendment.
“The honorable court reviewed the 16th Amendment to the Constitution in motivated way,” he said.
Inu hoped that the court will reconsider its judgment during the review, saying justices should be liable to Parliament like MPs and ministers.
Menon said an attempt is on to create division between the judiciary and the government.
Selim said the court itself violated the Constitution passing the judgment over the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. “The judgment will never be implemented if Parliament doesn’t implement it,” he added.
He said the justices have no right to do politics, but they are making remarks in different programme beyond their limits.
Bablu said Parliament had just restored the article 96 of the 1972 Constitution. “Parliament can impeach the President but not the persons who are appointed by the President. Does it go logically? Please restore the article 96 in the Constitution and respect the democracy,” he added.
Badal said the court will have to prove how the 16th Amendment challenged the basic structures of the Constitution.
He also criticised the court for its ‘disrespectful remarks’ about MPs. “You hurled disrespectful words to Parliament.”
On July 3 last, the Supreme Court (SC) passed the verdict upholding the High Court judgment that declared the 16th amendment to the Constitution illegal.
