*****

Sharing Dr. Shahdeen Malik's thought
The article written by Mr. Shahdeen Malik was simply terrific. The Writer superbly unveiled the character of our political parties and how they Are depriving people of their constitutional rights. Nonetheless they always put forward some lame excuses all the time, though some court verdicts are also available in some cases. However, he pinned down the role of different stakeholders as pressure group. He vehemently criticizes political parties for their hypocrisy. Despite an excellent role played by media, the writer was quite justified in his criticism of civil society. If civil society had been eloquent, governments would have felt more pressure. In conclusion, people should be made aware of their deprival of rights assigned by constitution more widely. Since the role of civil society is very vital, they must raise their voice. It might be in case of separation of judiciary or even in case of appointing an ombudsman.
Oli Md. Abdullah Chowdhury
Sylhet.

***

Controversy in judges appointment
Independence of judiciary is one of the basic features of our Constitution. Article 94 (4) and 116A of the Constitution declares that judges are independent in exercise of their judicial functions. Furthermore, article 22 stipulates that the state shall ensure the separation of the judiciary from the executive organs of the State. Thus, it is apparent that independence of judiciary is inextricable part of our constitution. In order to ensure independence of judiciary, the appointment of the judges should be healthy one. For this reason, Article 95 (1) of original Constitution provided "the Chief Justice shall be appointed by the President and the judges shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice". Later, the Constitution (fourth Amendment) Act'1975 deleted the provision of consultation with the Chief Justice in appointment of judges of the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, consultation with the Chief Justice before appointment of judges in the Supreme Court became a constitutional convention. But now, this convention has been ignored when the government confirmed only two of additional judges out of 8 additional judges in the high court division of the Supreme Court who were appointed by previous government. It is alleged that non-confirm judges were not faithful to the government. It has been a constitutional convention that senior most judge of the Supreme Court is appointed as Chief Justice and this convention was violated as well when the government appointed Justice K.M.Hasan as Chief Justice superseding other two judges. Finally, on August26, 2003, Tafazzul Islam was appointed as an Appellate Division Judge superseding his senior colleague Syed Amirul Islam. Earlier, the same person was superseded by Justice M.M Ruhul Amin in the Appellate Division on July12. It may be mentioned that Justice KM Hasan became victim of suppression during the last government.
All of these appointments have made judiciary vulnerable and given birth to resentment among the people. Because, if judges are appointed in contravention of constitutional convention superseding senior colleague, they may not discharge their duty impartially. Thus, independence of judiciary guaranteed in our constitution will no longer have any practical existence. Consequently, general people will be victim of these practices. Moreover, head of the state takes an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. So, we hope that President will play an important role to stop this controversial process of appointment of judges. In addition, in case of ensuring practical independence in lower judiciary, the government should implement the direction of SC which has laid down in Masdar Hossain case as soon as possible.
Bivuti Tarafder
3rd year, Department of law, DU.

****

Justice comes at last
After a long wait for five years, the verdict of Shazneen rape case has been delivered last week. And the present government deserves some credit to bring the case to an end in trial court. Because, they took some steps for expeditious trial of the case. This also gives the impression that if the government is serious and sincere we can dispose of the cases in due time. We have some flaws in our laws, and there are some lawyers who really take advantage of these loopholes. During the trial it was found that the defense lawyers who sought extension of time in numerous occasion and this was one of the reasons for delay in the trial. In the recent past we have witnessed some positive changes in our criminal justice system, especially after enactment of the Speedy Trial. Now cases are settled muck quickly in the Tribunals. We welcome this move. But few other things need to be considered in this regard. To me, the government and other concerned authorities must consider execution of the judgement within short period as expected by the families of all the victims. Other wise there will be no impact of the judgements in the society at all, and it will not help in any way to reduce criminality. Secondly the law ministry may think to amend or change the existing laws so that the evil people cannot take advantage to linger trial of the cases.
Mainul Haque
Govt. staff quarter, Azimpur, Dhaka.