Reason for scrapping 16th amendment unacceptable: Anisul

• Govt yet to decide on verdict
• Currently scrutinising full judgement
• Verdict emotional, not logical
• Govt astonished by CJ observations
• It will take initiative to expunge ‘irrelevant’ observations

The reason on which the Supreme Court has scrapped the 16th amendment to the constitution is not acceptable to the government, Law Minister Anisul Huq said today.

READ more: Supreme Judicial Council restored

“We have decided to take initiative to expunge the objectionable and irrelevant observations made by the chief justice in the judgement,” Anisul Huq said at a press conference.

He was giving a formal reaction on behalf of the government on the SC verdict that scrapped the parliament's power to remove the SC judges on grounds of misconduct or incapacity.

Also READ: SC won’t fall in trap of criticisms, says CJ

The minister further said the government is yet to decide whether it will seek review of the SC judgement.

“The government of Bangabandhu’s daughter Sheikh Hasina and the parliament never had any intention to limit or hamper the independence of the judiciary by any amendment,” he said.

The government was astonished at the observations made by the chief justice about article 116 of the constitution overlooking the “fact in issue”, the law minister said.

“We extend thanks to the four judges who disagreed with the CJ’s observations,” he said.

The verdict given by the CJ about declaring article 116 of the constitution unconstitutional is not based on logic, rather emotional and driven by hatred, he told journalists present at the conference that began at noon at the conference room of Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) affairs ministry in Dhaka.

“We should remember that the office of the CJ is a constitutional institution... It is our responsibility to protect the dignity of the institution,” Anisul added.

“I want to say that the institution is bigger than a person and the country is bigger than the institution,” he said.

The law minister said that he has respect for the verdict given by the Appellate Division of the SC though he disagrees with it.