HC adjourns hearing on writ challenging legality of Article 70

The High Court today further adjourned for two weeks the hearing on a writ petition that challenged the legality of the constitution’s Article 70 regarding cancellation of membership of a lawmaker for voting against his or her political party.

According to Article 70, a lawmaker has to vacate his or her seat if he or she votes in the parliament against the party that nominated him or her.

The HC bench of Justice Moyeenul Islam Chowdhury and Justice JBM Hassan also asked writ petitioner Advocate Eunus Ali Akond to submit a supplementary petition to it by this period containing the apex court’s observations about Article 70 in its verdict in the case on the constitution’s 16th amendment. 

The 16th amendment had empowered the parliament to remove the Supreme Court judges for “incapacity” or “misbehaviour”.

The Appellate Division of the SC in July this year upheld the HC verdict that scrapped the 16th amendment to the constitution with observations.     

The HC on August 8 had adjourned the hearing on the same writ petition till October 8 [today] as writ petitioner Eunus Ali Akond in a supplementary petition has “misquoted” the SC's observations about Article 70.

On April 18, Eunus submitted the writ petition with the HC, challenging the legality of Article 70, saying that it is against democracy and contradicts Articles 7, 19, 26, 27, 44, 31 and 119 of the constitution.

Deputy Attorney General Motaher Hossain Sazu opposed the writ petition saying that Eunus Ali Akond has filed the writ petition for his personal interest as he said in the writ petition that he is a candidate for the post of president of the republic.