Govt asked to explain some provisions
The High Court (HC) yesterday issued a rule upon the government to explain why some provisions of the Contempt of Court Ordinance 2008, including the rules of complaining against a judge and criticising judgments, should not be declared beyond the powers of the constitution and void.
After hearing a writ petition, the HC bench of Justice Syed Mahmud Hossain and Justice Farid Ahmed issued the rule, asking secretaries to the president and the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs to reply within two weeks.
Supreme Court lawyers advocate Shamsul Huq and advocate Tajul Islam filed the writ petition as a public interest litigation with the HC, challenging the legality of sections 2(ga), 3(1)(kha), 3(1)(ga), 3(1)(gha), 3(1)(cha), 3(1)(chha), 3(1)(ja), 3(3), 3(4), 3(5), 5(2), 7(1), 7(2), 10(1), 10(3), 10(5), 11, 14, 19, 22 and 23 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance 2008.
The petitioners stated that these sections have curtailed the powers of the Supreme Court under Article 108 of the constitution to give orders for investigation and punishment for contempt of court and as such those provisions violate the constitution and the principles of separation of the judiciary and its independence--some of the basic features of the constitution.
These are the sections, "which permit the filing of an application before the government for institution of disciplinary proceedings against a judge, and thereby obviating the necessity of conducting an enquiry by the Supreme Judicial Council under article 96(4) of the constitution", the petition said.
The cabinet on March 2 this year approved the Contempt of Court Ordinance 2008 and a gazette notification in this regard was issued on May 25.
The ordinance allows the press to publish and comment on "normal" court proceedings and functions or anyone to seek disciplinary proceedings against a judge as long as they are done in "good faith" and through "restrained language".
Alleged corruption or incompetence of any judge and their extra-judicial activities outside judicial functions can also be reported, according to the ordinance.
A judgment can also be criticised as long as it is "constructive".
According to the ordinance, a contempt of court would be punishable by six months' imprisonment or a fine of Tk 20,000.
Comments