Firstly, let us see how these judges are given the job to uphold our Constitution. Actually it is the easiest of all recruitment policy, allegedly, provided you are in the good book of the political parties. President appoints a judge of the Supreme Court under Article 95 of the Constitution. To become a judge a citizen of the country will either have to be enrolled as an advocate of the Supreme Court for 10 years [Art. 95(2) (a)] or have to hold judicial office for ten years within the territory of Bangladesh [Art. 95(2) (a)]. Once confirmed after two years of his appointment, he not only exercises immense power conferred under the Constitution [Art. 101 (original, appellate and other jurisdiction), 102 (Writ Jurisdiction) and 103 (revisional jurisdictionComplete Justice) etc.] without the fear of being transferred, dismissed, removed or terminated from his job until he is 65, [Art. 96(1)] but also enjoys financial security which "shall not be varied to the disadvantage during his [Art. 147(4) (e)] terms of office" [Art. 147(2)] and huge prestige. Unless a judge resigns by writing to the President [Art. 96(8)] he can only be removed from his post by the order of the President under Article 96 (6) following the provisions mentioned in clause 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Article 96 [Art. 96(2)] i.e. when the Supreme Judicial Council [constituted under Art 96(3)] after inquiry finds a judge to have ceased "to be capable of properly performing the function of his office by reason of physical or mental incapacity" [Art. 96(5) (a)] or has been "guilty of gross misconduct" [Art. 96(5) (b)]. The President may direct the Supreme Judicial Council "to inquire into the matter and reports its finding" to him "upon any information received from the Council or from any other source" [Art. 96(5)].

Let us see whether Art 95(2) (a) is enough for appointment of a judge in the apex court of the country. There are different types of advocates from different background practising or non-practising but enrolled in the Supreme Court e.g. Law-College graduate Advocates, University graduate Advocates, master degree Advocates, Ph.D. Advocates, Justice Advocates, Barrister Advocates or mixer of the same and some with other educational qualifications in addition to the aforesaid. After enrolment one may only keep his enrolment updated by paying his dues and do not have to go to the court to keep is licence intact. There are many who are only busy in the mention hours which do not require any notable skill and may spend entire ten years, even more, by mentioning petty or simple matters before the Court e.g. extension of bail or stay. These lawyers may even sign the Vokalotnamas (power) of many cases although they were not in anyway involved in that case but to mention in the morning hours or monitoring the daily cause list during the court hours for other lawyers. Number of years an advocate is enrolled with Supreme Court or number of cases he filed, under no circumstances, can be the basis for selecting the name of an advocate for the post of a judge of the Supreme Court.

As it is clear from Article 95 that President appoints the judges. However, as a president he is not supposed to know the names of the competent lawyers who would be suitable for the job. Then the question arises who supplies him with the name of the Advocates? Does he randomly select names from the enrolment list or he gets the name from the Law Minister, Attorney General or Chief Justice? In the 1972 Constitution (our first Constitution) there was provision of consultation with the Chief Justice. However, it is not there anymore in our present Constitution and consultation with the Chief Justice is not required anymore.

According to the former Law Minister and also present and former Attorney General the Chief Justice provides the President with the name of the advocates, through the Prime Ministers office (Art. 48(3)], to be appointed as additional judges of the Supreme Court. This begs the question if that is so then how Justice Syed Shadidur Rahman's name went to the President when there was allegation against him of misappropriating of the Supreme Court Bar Association's fund when he was holding a position of the Association.

If we cannot get a modern judiciary with honest persons the poor citizen of this country will have no place to go for justice. Under the banner of political parties we lawyers are clouding the atmosphere of the judiciary for no good reason. Sadly institutions like Bar Council, Bar Associations are under the bad influence of political parties. Attorney General's office is a constitutional post and should serve for the causes of the citizen of this country. However, are they serving for the purpose for which they are appointed?

Recent incidents regarding Justice Syed Shadidur Rahman can never be an isolated event but only one of the many issues buried under the carpet which need to be addressed to set up a modern and competent judiciary. People's Judiciary.

Barrister M. Moksadul Islam is an advocate of the Supreme Court.