The dispute has forced the council, the statutory body of lawyers, to go for holding a "requisition meeting" this month, for the first time in its history, in the face of repeated resistance from the attorney general since late last month.

The elected council members wanted to hold an emergency meeting following the recent High Court ban on lawyers' agitation but the newly appointed Attorney General From page 20

(AG) AJ Mohammad Ali refused to authorise the meeting.

The rift developed in the council that represents 28,000 lawyers across the country, against the backdrop of the lawyers' continuous agitation for removal of controversial Additional High Court Judge Faisal Mahmud Faizee.

The agitation has already faced opposition from the government law officers and pro-government lawyers. Even the speaker of the Jatiya Sangsad and the law minister have taken stance against the agitating lawyers.

Bar Council Vice-chairman Rokanuddin Mahmud on May 25 sent a notice to the government-appointed AG stating that they wanted to hold as emergency meeting to discuss "rule of law and freedom of legal profession."

The AG, as the chairman of the council, was expected to sign the notice as per the council's tradition. But he declined to sign it and wanted to discuss the meeting's agenda with Rokan. On May 26, he had discussion with Rokan.

On May 28, the council sent a fresh notice, changing the meeting agenda to "rights of lawyers, privileges and interests." But the AG again declined to sign it.

Then seven elected members of the council in a joint letter to the AG requested him to immediately convene a requisition meeting, as he (AG) had expressed unwillingness to discuss the issues in an emergency meeting.

"Otherwise we shall be forced to convene the requisition meeting to discuss rule of law and freedom of legal profession, and rights, privileges and interest of lawyers," said the letter signed by Rokanuddin, Yusuf Hossain Humayun, Sahara Khaturn, ZI Khan Panna, Parimal Chandra Guha, Sardar Md Suruzzaman and Mahbubey Alam.

The AG the next day replied through a note: The discussion on rule of law and freedom of legal profession [agenda no 1] does not come within the scope of article 10 of the Bar Council Order, 1972. The agenda no 2 [rights, privileges and interest of lawyers] is a mere camouflage to discuss agenda no 1.

"(The) Requisition notice having neither spelt out the emergency nor the necessity for convening such a meeting. I don't think that the notice for calling a requisition meeting is within the purview of Bar Council Order, 1972," he added.

Receiving the note, the council members started preparing for the requisition meeting. "We expect to hold this meeting within 15th of this month," said ZI Khan Panna, the council's human rights and legal aid committee chairman.

Asked, Attorney General Mohammad Ali last night told The Daily Star, "The subject which the members wanted to discuss does not fall under the purview of Bar Council's functions. So there is no question to endorse the meeting."

Council members said the government often creates pressure on the council using the position of AG. However, it is a tradition that if the AG disagrees with any meeting agenda, he refrains from attending the meeting or keeps silence at the meeting.

For instance, the immediately past AG Hassan Ariff had refrained from attending the Bar Council meeting in April in which the council had cancelled the certificate of enrollment of judge Faizee on charge of furnishing false information.

Ariff's silence, however, angered the government. He finally resigned in late April and was replaced by AJ Mohammad Ali on May 1.

But the newly appointed AG engaged in loggerheads with the Bar Council members by opposing a pre-scheduled extended meeting of all presidents and secretaries of district bar associations which discussed the issue of Faizee among other issues.

He refrained from joining the May 13 meeting after giving a note: "...This notice [of the extended meeting] issued under the signature of the vice chairman is not backed by any provisions of the Bar Council Order, 1972."

The pro-government lawyers who were informed about the AG's note created chaos in the meeting which was adjourned halfway.

The 14-member Bar Council body was elected last year for a three-year term. Twelve of the members were elected from the opposition-backed panel and only two from the ruling BNP panel.