Parliamentary hearing before appointments

The parliamentary special committee for constitutional amendment is considering a proposition for introducing a system of parliamentary confirmation for appointments to constitutional posts.
The move was sparked by an effort to avoid controversies regarding such appointments, by doing away with room for politicisation of the process.
A parliamentary committee consisting senior lawmakers of political parties will hold a public confirmation hearing after the government makes any appointment to any constitutional post, says the proposal.
If the committee is satisfied through the hearing, it will give consent to the appointment and then the appointee will be able to take the oath of office. It will ensure quality and transparency in appointments, several members of the special committee told The Daily Star.
People with dubious records will not dare to express their willingness to be appointed to the posts as their previous records might be made public in the hearings, they said.
At present the executive branch of the state maintains secrecy during the process of appointing constitutional officers, and the people come to know about the appointments only after the process is completed.
The special committee on March 29 at a meeting held in Jatiya Sangsad Bhaban had preliminary discussions on the idea, it will hold further discussions on the matter.
"Majority members of the committee are in favour of introducing the system. So, we will try to take the idea forward," a member of the special committee said, wishing anonymity.
The move comes in response to controversies over appointments of the Supreme Court judges, chief election commissioner (CEC), election commissioners, chairmen and members of the Public Service Commission (PSC), and the attorney general -- as the executive branch of the state always controls the appointments.
"If the system is introduced, it will contribute to bringing an end to the controversies regarding the appointments," said Rashed Khan Menon, a member of the special committee.
Contacted by The Daily Star, two eminent jurists Ghulam Rabbani and Shahdeen Malik echoed Menon.
"I definitely support the idea. If the public hearing system is introduced and the hearing is broadcast live like the congressional hearings in the US, then it will bring good result for the nation," Rabbani, also a former judge of the Appellatte Division of Supreme Court, said.
He also stressed the need for appointing an ombudsman in line with a constitutional provision.
"This is the best method of appointing the most deserving candidates through an open and transparent process. If this procedure is established, finally merits and qualifications will prevail over party loyalty," Malik said lauding the idea.
Rashed Khan Menon, also the chief of Workers Party, who placed the proposal at the parliamentary special committee, said they will hold detail discussions regarding whether the idea is realistic in Bangladesh's present context.
He however said such system exists in many countries, and it has been proven effective in ensuring quality appointments to constitutional posts.
Talking to The Daily Star on condition of anonymity, another member of the special committee expressed scepticism about implementation of the idea, as the committee has yet to know about the prime minister's thoughts on it.
"I don't know whether the government will agree to lose its sweeping authority over the appointments. If the parliamentary confirmation system is introduced, the government must appoint qualified people to the posts, and it will not be able to favour people loyal to them" he said.
Another member of the special committee opposed the idea, saying, the system of parliamentary confirmation will politicise the appointments more.
The member is in favour of making a committee headed by the chief justice and representatives of the Supreme Court Bar Association, and Bangladesh Bar Council to pick the candidates for appointments as judges of the Supreme Court.
The immediate past caretaker government led by Fakhruddin Ahmed moved to reform the procedure for appointing Supreme Court judges.
It promulgated an ordinance in March 2008 and formed a Supreme Judicial Commission to ensure transparency and impartiality in appointments of SC judges.
The ordinance prescribed setting up of a nine-member commission headed by the chief justice, which would recommend names for appointments as additional judges of the High Court. The HC in April 2008 stayed the functions of the Supreme Judicial Commission for three months.
And eventually, the caretaker government's move did not see the light of day.