Syed Badrul Ahsan: Political attacks on Chief Justice of Bangladesh Supreme Court set a bad precedent.
The manner in which
the ruling Awami League and its supporters in Bangladesh have pounced on the
Chief Justice (CJ), Surendra Kumar Sinha, clearly militates against the essence
of democracy or even a fledgeling democracy. The conflict which has pitted the
ruling party against the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has its origins in
the judgment on the 16th amendment to the constitution. The amendment, which
would empower members of parliament to impeach judges of the high court and
supreme court, was struck down, first by the former and then by the latter.
In the course of
announcing the judgment, following hearings in the appellate division of the
high court, Justice Sinha made certain observations in relation to the history
of the emergence of Bangladesh in 1971. He paid full tribute to the leadership
of the country’s founding father, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, in the
movement for freedom, noting that an entire nation took part in the struggle.
Rather than being the contribution of a single individual, stated the Chief
Justice, it was a collective experience for Bangladesh.
The CJ’s observations,
taken out of context, swiftly landed him in troubled waters. The ruling circles
were incensed that he had undermined and belittled, in their view, the
contributions of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in the creation of Bangladesh. Late last
month, it was the turn of a former judge of the appellate division, none too
well-disposed towards the chief justice, to jump into the fray. Justice
Shamsuddin Chowdhury, who retired last year and has had a public spat with
Justice Sinha on the issue of delivery of judgments in time, has launched a
broadside against Sinha. He joins that disturbingly growing band of people who
have seemingly decided that the chief justice has committed a grievous wrong
and must now pay the price.
In his assault on the
CJ, Justice Chowdhury has questioned whether Justice Sinha himself wrote, in
the space of 25 days, all 400 pages of the observations relating to the
appellate division’s verdict on the 16th amendment. He thinks it is humanly impossible
for an individual to write that long a manuscript in that brief a period. The point here is not
that Justice Sinha finished writing those pages in 25 days. It is why Justice
Chowdhury has now thought it necessary to raise his question. One is only too
aware of the public position he took in his last skirmish with the CJ, a
position he ought not to have taken. Now that he has found a new reason to
launch a verbal assault on Justice Sinha, there is a strong whiff of prejudice.
The former judge makes things worse when he accuses the CJ of having had his
observations written by Pakistan’s infamous ISI.
The CJ, Chowdhury has
warned, will have to leave the country if he does not recognise Mujib’s
leadership in Bangladesh’s independence movement. And now, Agriculture Minister
Matia Chowdhury has waded into the issue. She has asked the CJ to leave the
country or be treated for mental illness. In all these weeks, Sinha has had
arrows flying at him from all directions. He is, say his detractors, guilty of
undermining the historical role of the Father of the Nation. Justice Chowdhury has
warned Justice Sinha that the latter will not only have to resign but also be
compelled to leave the country in light of his legal observations. Minister
Matia Chowdhury has echoed him.
It is always
nerve-wracking for citizens to have to confront the spectacle of the executive
and judicial branches of government trading fisticuffs. In these past few days,
ministers have gone after the chief justice over his observations. All of this
has created a bad precedent: In the future, functionaries of governments to
come might well take recourse to similar moves, leading to a further fraying of
the fabric of governance.
Former justices and
former chief justices do not, as part of a time-honoured tradition, make public
their views on the work or judicial decisions of their successors. That
tradition has now been severely damaged. The systematic way in which CJ Sinha
is being berated by individuals in the ruling dispensation does not bode well
for Bangladesh. It is a sad situation,
made grim by the unhealthy and growing feeling that reason has been giving way
to intimidation, that values are getting mauled in the brickbats flying around
the person and office of the Chief Justice of Bangladesh’s Supreme Court.
see also
