Court Correspondent :
A lawyer of the Supreme Court on Monday filed a writ petition in the High Court Division of the Supreme Court challenging Article 70 of the Constitution of the country.
Advocate Eunus Ali Akond submitted the writ petition saying that the Article is against democracy. It is also against Article 7, 19, 26, 27, 44, 31 and 119 of the Constitution.
According to Article 70, a member of Parliament has to vacate his or her seat if he/she resigns from his or her party or vote in the Parliament against the party.
The petitioner said, “A member of Parliament is a representative of the people. But once in Parliament, Article 70 prevents him/her from going against the party and presenting their own opinion because they risk losing their seat. For this reason, the Article is undemocratic and clashes with the democratic principles of the Constitution,” Advocate Akond said.
He also said that under democracy, the republic will be conducted by the elected representatives of the people.
Advocate Akond added that if a Parliament Member’s membership is cancelled for voting against his or her political party, he/she can not independently vote in the public interest.
The petition may be heard after the Supreme Court returns from the recess.
The writ petitioner named Cabinet Secretary, Parliament Secretariat Secretary and the Law Secretary as defendants.
However, the High Court is yet to fix any date for hearing the writ petition.
A lawyer of the Supreme Court on Monday filed a writ petition in the High Court Division of the Supreme Court challenging Article 70 of the Constitution of the country.
Advocate Eunus Ali Akond submitted the writ petition saying that the Article is against democracy. It is also against Article 7, 19, 26, 27, 44, 31 and 119 of the Constitution.
According to Article 70, a member of Parliament has to vacate his or her seat if he/she resigns from his or her party or vote in the Parliament against the party.
The petitioner said, “A member of Parliament is a representative of the people. But once in Parliament, Article 70 prevents him/her from going against the party and presenting their own opinion because they risk losing their seat. For this reason, the Article is undemocratic and clashes with the democratic principles of the Constitution,” Advocate Akond said.
He also said that under democracy, the republic will be conducted by the elected representatives of the people.
Advocate Akond added that if a Parliament Member’s membership is cancelled for voting against his or her political party, he/she can not independently vote in the public interest.
The petition may be heard after the Supreme Court returns from the recess.
The writ petitioner named Cabinet Secretary, Parliament Secretariat Secretary and the Law Secretary as defendants.
However, the High Court is yet to fix any date for hearing the writ petition.
