onstitution (16th Amendment) Bill 2014 has been at the watchdog now for further scrutiny. After a committee meeting, Sengupta told reporters that the interest group takes “removal” and “impeachment” for the same meaning. “The vested interest is opposing the amendment as if the government wants to control the court. Some responsible leaders have also joined the quarter.” Sengupta, also an advisory council member of Awami League, said the committee wants to take a wide divergence of opinion. “If the government allows the committee, it’ll take expert opinion.” “After getting the bill in the committee,” he earlier said, “it will invite the Supreme Court, Bar Council and BNP for their opinions.” Opposing the move, BNP said the government wants to establish an absolute authority on the judiciary through the amendment. “The vested quarter is spreading propaganda in a politically motivated manner,” Sengupta mentioned. “There’s no question of impeachment here as impeachment is only for the President. And such move is taken if the President gets involved in serious misconduct or violates the constitution.” During the formulation of the 1972 Constitution, parliament had the authority to remove and determine the tenure of the judges of the Supreme Court. Military ruler Ziaur Rahman dropped the provision through a military order and formed a new mechanism—Supreme Judicial Council—to impeach the judges. The governing party wants to empower parliament through amending the country’s highest charter. Law Minister Anisul Hoque on Sunday placed the widely discussed bill in parliament that later sent it to the standing committee concerned for scrutiny, giving it a seven-day timeline for a report. Sengupta said, “Impeachment for the President, Prime Minister and Speaker has been mentioned in the bill as they are elected representatives but judges are appointed in the court.” “All judges won’t be removed from their offices, rather anyone accused of misconduct will be removed,” he said and queried that, “Should any judge with incapability or having madness remain in position?” Parliament had the authority since 1972 to 1975 but it was not exercised during the period. Sengupta, one of the framers of the original charter, said a judge would not be removed from office after an allegation. “A law will be to this end. A probe body, comprising individuals concerned, will look into the allegation first.” If the probe body sends the issue to parliament, only then parliament will endorse it, he opined. As to the likelihood of any constitutional crisis before enactment of the law, Sengupta posed counter questions: “What remains till now? Does the Supreme Judicial Council impeach anyone?” When asked who would be in the probe body, Sengupta said everything would be mentioned in the law.
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
16th amendment to remove judges, not to impeach:Daily Sun
onstitution (16th Amendment) Bill 2014 has been at the watchdog now for further scrutiny. After a committee meeting, Sengupta told reporters that the interest group takes “removal” and “impeachment” for the same meaning. “The vested interest is opposing the amendment as if the government wants to control the court. Some responsible leaders have also joined the quarter.” Sengupta, also an advisory council member of Awami League, said the committee wants to take a wide divergence of opinion. “If the government allows the committee, it’ll take expert opinion.” “After getting the bill in the committee,” he earlier said, “it will invite the Supreme Court, Bar Council and BNP for their opinions.” Opposing the move, BNP said the government wants to establish an absolute authority on the judiciary through the amendment. “The vested quarter is spreading propaganda in a politically motivated manner,” Sengupta mentioned. “There’s no question of impeachment here as impeachment is only for the President. And such move is taken if the President gets involved in serious misconduct or violates the constitution.” During the formulation of the 1972 Constitution, parliament had the authority to remove and determine the tenure of the judges of the Supreme Court. Military ruler Ziaur Rahman dropped the provision through a military order and formed a new mechanism—Supreme Judicial Council—to impeach the judges. The governing party wants to empower parliament through amending the country’s highest charter. Law Minister Anisul Hoque on Sunday placed the widely discussed bill in parliament that later sent it to the standing committee concerned for scrutiny, giving it a seven-day timeline for a report. Sengupta said, “Impeachment for the President, Prime Minister and Speaker has been mentioned in the bill as they are elected representatives but judges are appointed in the court.” “All judges won’t be removed from their offices, rather anyone accused of misconduct will be removed,” he said and queried that, “Should any judge with incapability or having madness remain in position?” Parliament had the authority since 1972 to 1975 but it was not exercised during the period. Sengupta, one of the framers of the original charter, said a judge would not be removed from office after an allegation. “A law will be to this end. A probe body, comprising individuals concerned, will look into the allegation first.” If the probe body sends the issue to parliament, only then parliament will endorse it, he opined. As to the likelihood of any constitutional crisis before enactment of the law, Sengupta posed counter questions: “What remains till now? Does the Supreme Judicial Council impeach anyone?” When asked who would be in the probe body, Sengupta said everything would be mentioned in the law.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment