BNP out to make AL judiciary's opponent

The Awami League yesterday alleged that the BNP with ill intentions was trying to make it an opponent of the judiciary.

“None should do politics over the Supreme Court verdict. The judiciary should be kept above party and opinion. The judiciary is the last resort of people. So there should not be any politics or difference over it, but they [BNP] are doing it,” AL Presidium Member Abdul Matin Khasru said at a press conference at the party's Dhanmondi office in the capital.

“Supreme Court is not our opponent, it's the BNP. I read a statement today [yesterday] and watched TV and found that the party with ill intentions was trying to make us opponent of the judiciary,” he added.

The apex court on August 1 released the full text of its verdict, scrapping the 16th amendment to the constitution that had given parliament the power to remove SC judges for misconduct or incapacity.

Eight days after the release of the full verdict, the AL yesterday came up with its formal reaction.

Khasru said the verdict given by the SC cannot be a matter of a debate and politics.

But the AL was witnessing that some BNP leaders, including Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir and Moudud Ahmed, were giving provocative speeches and they were out to do politics over the verdict, which was regrettable, he said.

“We are trying to clarify that they are giving different explanations by distorting the verdict intentionally to serve their political interest,” said Khasru, also a former law minister.

The BNP is saying that the government should step down. However, no mention was made in the verdict that the government is illegal. The court should take action against them, he said.

AL Law Affairs Secretary SM Rezaul Karim said, “We are reviewing the scrapping of the 16th constitutional amendment. The party is working on whether it should file a review petition or seek exclusion of part of the verdict.”

The SC in its 16th amendment verdict observed, “No nation-no country is made of or by one person.”

It also said if parliament is not mature enough, it would be a suicidal attempt to give the House the power of removing judges of the higher judiciary.

Referring to these observations, Rezaul said even the Razakars of 1971 Liberation War period would admit that the country was liberated under the leadership of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.

These were unexpected and unwarranted, he said, adding that these were not related to the subject matter of the case.

The lawyer alleged that the BNP distorted the judgment and the SC should take suo moto action against its leaders.

Khasru said no country in the world witnessed such a debate over a SC verdict.

Meanwhile, Commerce Minister Tofail Ahmed has said those who want to “bring an unconstitutional force to state power” are trying to demean the politicians.

“Who wants to undermine the politicians? It is those who want military rule and bring an unelected government to power,” he told a discussion organised by Bangladesh Medical Association in the city's BMA Auditorium.

“Those who termed the incumbent parliament immature are themselves immature. Those who are now sitting in judges' seats are immature. They don't have any right to raise any question about the incumbent parliament.”

The senior AL leader said there is a provision in the constitution to give legitimacy to an uncontested election. “If holding an uncontested election in a particular constituency is legal, then holding such elections in many constituencies is also legal.”

Regarding the SC's observation in the verdict that the country was not liberated under the leadership of an individual, the minister said, “I want to ask who other than Bangabandhu led the country's Liberation War. Those who are holding the judges' offices today had once worked with us as activists. Now they [judges] are mature and we are immature.”

Criticising the judges, Tofail said some “unexpected observations” were included in the verdict only to undermine politicians.