Mixed reaction among lawyers

A number of senior legal experts yesterday expressed mixed reactions over the Supreme Court verdict that declared illegal the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
Constitution expert Dr M Zahir welcomed the apex court verdict and its observations. He said the apex court judgement is good on the whole since it has paved the way to bring back secularism and socialism as state principles.
He however contradicted the SC observations on the issue of citizenship of the people of Bangladesh. It was not a matter of past and close, and not related to the prayer in the petition, on which the HC had declared the amendment illegal, he said.
Nationality or citizenship should be own affairs of the people, he said, raising question as to why the SC interfered in this.
It is not clear what are the differences between "Bangladeshi citizenship" and "Bangladeshi nationalism," Dr Zahir said while talking to The Daly Star.
The eminent jurist said the SC has bid farewell to martial law, but the military rulers will not read the Constitution before they come.
He added it is the parliamentary committee that will decide whether any amendment has to be made to restore the original Constitution of 1972, although many things of the original constitution have automatically been restored.
No political party can be formed on the basis of religion as per the SC verdict, he said.
Talking on the issue, Advocate TH Khan told reporters the military would think several times before taking state power in future.
He however asked whether the country's security force would remain silent if a situation like that of October 28, 2006 arose.
On October 28, 2006, at least five people were killed and hundreds were injured in daylong sporadic clashes among Awami League activists, police and Jamaat activists in the capital. The clashes occurred centring the AL-led 14-party's blockade programme, which aimed at preventing former chief justice KM Hasan from taking charge as the chief adviser to the caretaker government.
TH Khan said the present government will use this verdict to avoid referendum in bringing amendments in a few provisions of the Constitution.
Late president Ziaur Rahman brought the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution cancelling the fourth amendment that had curtailed power of the judges, he added.
Khan said it would not be decent if the government hurts the people by removing the spirit of Islam and the holy Quran through amending the Constitution.
If parliament keeps the words "absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah", it would not violate the Constitution, he observed.
Barrister Moudud Ahmed in his observation said cases can be moved against the immediate past caretaker government and the Election Commission on charge of violating the Constitution following the SC verdict.
In violation of the Constitution, the caretaker government was in state power for two years, and the Election Commission did not hold parliamentary election within 90 days after BNP-led alliance handed over power to the caretaker government, he said.
He said it is time to see what steps the government will take following the SC verdict.
Moudud however said this was his personal reaction as a lawyer and he will make his political reaction later.
President of the Supreme Court Bar Association Khandker Mahbub Hossain said the apex court on one hand struck down the words "absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah" and on the other hand kept "Bismillah-Ar-Rahman-Ar-Rahim" and Islam as state religion.
Speaking anonymously, a pro-Jamaat-e Islami lawyer said the SC in its verdict has totally damaged the hopes and aspirations of his party by prohibiting politics based on religion.
Following this verdict, law of Islam cannot be allowed in Bangladesh where over 80 percent people are Muslims, he said. "How can the people of Bangladesh accept such a judgment?" he asked.