Verdict on candidate's disclosure Dec 11

The Supreme Court (SC) has finally decided to deliver its judgment on December 11 on the much-talked-about appeal against the High Court (HC) directive to the Election Commission (EC) to collect and publish eight-point personal information about candidates for parliamentary election.
The full bench of the Appellate Division of the SC headed by Chief Justice Mohammad Ruhul Amin yesterday also ordered the advocate on record for appellant Abu Safa to produce him before the court on the day of delivery of verdict.
The SC passed the order and fixed the date for judgment after two days of hearing on the long pending appeal.
The appeal remained pending since the SC chamber judge stayed in December last year the HC directive issued in response to a writ petition filed with it. The EC initiated a move recently to expedite hearing on the appeal filed by Abu Safa as it now wants to incorporate the provision of eight-point personal information in its rules.
The EC requested the attorney general's office to move for hearing and disposal of the appeal immediately.
Against this backdrop, the hearing started on Monday. Dr Kamal Hossain Yesterday moved in the SC as counsel for those who had filed the writ petition with the HC.
The petitioners are advocates Abdul Momen Chowdhury, KM Zabir and Zahurul Islam.
Momen, who was present in the SC during the hearing yesterday, told The Daily Star that they argued Abu Safa obtained the SC stay order against the HC directive by providing false information.
“We told the court (SC) that Safa is a fraud. He is a night guard but he had informed the court that he is a social worker, and he established a school in his constituency. But he never carried out such activities,” said Momen.
“We (petitioners) submitted an application to the court (SC) to draw proceedings against Safa as he provided false information to it to obtain the stay order and leave to appeal,” Momen added.
Barrister Sara Hossain and some other lawyers assisted Dr Kamal Hossain.
The HC passed the order on May 24, 2005, in response to the writ petition filed as a public interest litigation by the three lawyers. Earlier on April 23, the day the writ was filed, it (HC) issued a rule on the EC.
The SC stay order came following a controversial move by a group of BNP-Jamaat alliance leaders and lawyers including former law minister Moudud Ahmed.
Abu Safa of Swandip filed the appeal last year. His lawyers said he read up to class eight and still wanted to participate in parliament election as a social worker. But he feared he might face some kind of discrimination in the election if his educational qualification is published. And that is why he had decided to challenge the HC order.
But lawyers and rights activists found out that he was not settled in Swandip and he did not file nomination papers for the election, which was slated for January 22 this year.
INFORMATION HC WANTS TO BE MADE PUBLIC
The HC had directed the EC to gather and publish information about prospective candidates' academic qualifications (to be supported by certificates), and whether they are accused in any criminal cases at present or whether there were any criminal records in the past.
It also wanted the EC to collect details about profession and sources of income of the candidates.
The EC was asked also to know and publish whether a candidate had been a member of parliament before, and the role he/she had played individually and collectively in fulfilling the commitment made to the people.
Besides, the HC asked it to obtain information about the amount of loans taken by a candidate from banks and financial institutions (personally, jointly or in the name of dependents) or loans taken from a company of which the candidate is chairman or director.
Assets and liabilities of the candidates and their dependants should also be reported, the HC directive said.