Law
week
Building
knock-down stopped on HC stay order
Rajdhani Unnayan Katripakkha (Rajuk) authorities yesterday
said they could not demolish the unapproved 11-storey
building in Patuatuli in Old Dhaka due to a High Court
stay. A statement signed by Md Nasiruddin, member (planning),
said the Rajuk chairman had allocated Tk 4.56 lakh to
knock down the building.
Rajuk
sent a team comprising magistrates and police with necessary
equipment to bulldoze the building on 11 May. But the
team could not perform its duty due to the HC order, the
statement added. If the building collapsed, the owner
would be held responsible, since Rajuk had sent him several
notices, it said. However, the authorities claimed they
have already taken legal measures to lift the stay order,
as the structure has become a threat to a large number
of people. "Rajuk will demolish the unapproved part
of the building as soon as the stay is lifted," said
the statement. -The
Daily Star, May 19.
SC
Bar to cancel Sircar, Moudud membership
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on May 17, decided
to cancel membership of the speaker and the law minister
for their remarks against SCBA lawyers' ongoing agitation
demanding removal of an additional High Court judge.Noted
jurists Dr Kamal Hossain and Dr M Zahir also questioned
the speaker's ruling against the lawyers' movement, saying
the speaker of the Jatiya Sangsad has no jurisdiction
to issue such a ruling on matters out side the House.
Speaker Jamiruddin Sircar and Law, Justice and Parliamentary
Affairs Minister Moudud Ahmed are associate members of
the SCBA which has been spearheading a movement for removal
of the judge, Faisal Mahmud Faizee, since last month.
-The Daily Star,
May 18.
Judges,
Bar agitation brew storm at JS
Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Moudud
Ahmed in parliament slammed leaders of the Supreme Court
Bar Association (SCBA) and Bangladesh Bar Council for
staging demonstrations on the Supreme Court premises.
Moudud
criticised the Supreme Court for not taking any actions
against the demonstrators and questioned, "Doesn't
it fall into a [category of] contempt when a section of
lawyers are blocking the chief justice's entrance?"
Referring to instances of contempt of court for 'misconduct'
in relation to judges outside the courtroom, the law minister
said it depends on the Supreme Court to uphold its image.
He criticised the judges who do not sign the certified
copies of their judgements. The government has been deprived
of about Tk 1,200 crore in revenues as the National Revenue
Board cannot get certified copies of the judgements. "I
have a list of 300 cases in which the judges are delaying
putting signatures," he added.
Speaker
Jamiruddin Sircar in a ruling said the Supreme Judicial
Council should see whether the delay is being caused by
inefficiencies of the judges and if so, those judges should
be removed. Describing it as a 'conspiracy within to undermine
the judiciary', the law minister said, "The Supreme
Judicial Council should take necessary steps in this regard.
It is not possible for us to get involved in the situation.
-The Daily Star,
May 17.
Contempt
rule on judge, PP, accused
The High Court (HC) served a suo moto contempt rule on
a Dhaka court judge, the public prosecutor (PP) and the
sacked managing director (MD) of Inqilab TV for granting
the MD bail in a sedition case in the lower court while
the matter was pending with the High Court. Judge Mohammad
Shamsul Alam Khan of the Court of First Additional Metropolitan
Sessions Judge, Dhaka, PP Abdullah Mahmud Hassan and Shoaib
Chowdhury are to respond to the rule that ordered them
to explain why contempt proceedings should not be drawn
against them.
The
High Court Division Bench of Justice Khademul Islam Chowdhury
and Justice Emdadul Haq Azad also directed them to appear
before the court on May 24 to explain their position on
the matter.
The
metropolitan sessions judge's court granted bail to the
terminated Inqilab TV MD, Salauddin Shoaib Chowdhury,
on April 30 in a sedition case upon a bond of Tk 1 lakh
with four guarantors. The PP did not oppose the bail petition
despite being the prosecution lawyer since the case was
filed on January 24 last year. During hearing on the bail
petition, PP Hassan had told the court that he would have
no objection to the bail move since the court grants the
accused bail with proper guarantors. -The
Daily Star, May 17.
WB
Immunity Bill JS body places report
A parliamentary standing committee report recommending
passage of the much-talked about bill that proposes immunity
to World Bank (WB) in its operations in Bangladesh was
placed in the Jatiya Sangsad.
Chairman
of the parliamentary standing committee on finance ministry
Mushfiqur Rahman tabled the report in which Awami League
lawmaker Mohammad Sayedul Haque gave a note of dissent
saying the bill put the WB above the law.
The
main opposition party lawmaker in his note said the bill
goes against the constitution and democracy. The bill,
titled The International Financial Organisations (Amendment)
Act, 2005, proposes incorporating two new articles into
The International Financial Organisations Order, 1972
(Presidential Order No 86 of 1972). The bill provides
for legal immunity to the World Bank and if it is passed,
no one can sue any of the bank staff for their operations
in Bangladesh.
The
bill was placed in parliament on October 31 last year
amid widespread criticism by the opposition political
parties, the civil society and rights groups.
"No
other country in the world gave such immunity to the World
Bank by enacting such a black law," Sayedul Haque
said in the note of dissent. He said if the bill is passed,
citizens of Bangladesh will be deprived of their right
to sue the World Bank even if any of its policies brings
any damage to the country. -Prothom
Alo, May 16.
Govt
framing new law on court contempt
Proceedings of contempt of court in recent months on the
ground of 'misconduct' in relation to judges outside the
courtroom have prompted the government to move to introduce
a new contempt law immediately.
The
government feels the term -- contempt of court -- should
be specifically defined as some judges have sued people
on charges of contempt following incidents in their personal
life.
"It
is high time to define what is contempt of court,"
Law Minister Moudud Ahmed said yesterday at a closed-door
meeting with the Law Commission. He urged former chief
justice Mostafa Kamal, chairman of the commission, for
expediting drafting of their recommendations to that end.
The law minister also advocated amendments to the rules
of the Supreme Court (SC) for resolving problems including
delay in the process of completing judgements.
Presently,
there is no law on contempt of court except for one of
1926 introduced by the British rulers in regards to the
contempt of court. Experts say the law does not define
contempt, neither does it give guidelines on how to define
it. The law ministry sent a reference to the Law Commission
that, on completion of its review, is working on a draft
bill on contempt of court by changing the 1926 one. -The
Daily Star, May 16.
HC
rule on govt as HR body not formed
The High Court (HC) asked the government and the Parliament
Secretariat to explain why it (government) should not
be directed to form a National Human Rights Commission
for protecting human rights.
The
rule came after Supreme Court lawyers Abdul Momen Chowdhury,
KM Zabir and Zahrul Islam filed a writ petition about
the urgency of forming the commission, a key election
pledge of the ruling four-party alliance. A Division Bench
of the HC asked the law secretary and secretary of the
Parliament Secretariat to submit their reply in eight
weeks.
The
petitioners said establishment of a human rights commission
is indispensable for social, economic and political rights
and for administration of justice. It is needed also to
prevent corruption and alleviate poverty, they stressed.
According
to sources, a draft bill on National Human Rights Commission,
prepared in 2003, is gathering dust at the Cabinet Division.
The government formed a cabinet committee headed by the
law minister on December 10, 2001 to prepare the draft
bill. After a series of meetings, the committee finalised
the draft and sent it to the Cabinet Division on January
23, 2003. It was placed at the cabinet meeting on January
29 the same year. The cabinet however sent the bill back
to the law ministry for further scrutiny. Since then it
is lying at the ministry. -The
Daily Star, May 15.
Corresponding
with the Law Desk
Please send your mails, queries, and opinions to: Law
Desk, The Daily Star 19 Karwan Bazar, Dhaka-1215;
telephone 8124944,8124955,fax 8125155;email <dslawdesk@yahoo.co.uk,lawdesk@thedailystar.net
