In a series of distressing events in Bangladesh over the past eight years, the sight of a former chief justice being led to court in handcuffs, wearing a bulletproof vest and helmet, is particularly unsettling. Instances including a chief justice fleeing his official residence during a popular uprising to seek refuge in a military garrison, and another being forcefully evicted by plainclothes security agents and exiled from the country, paint a tragic picture of the judiciary’s systematic dismantling by the powerful ruler Sheikh Hasina.
The pivotal moment in this erosion came with the repeal of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which eliminated the provision for a non-partisan caretaker government to oversee elections. This move allowed Sheikh Hasina to conduct three consecutive one-sided elections, consolidating her hold on power. While the Supreme Court had the authority to rule on the amendment, the actions of the then Chief Justice ABM Khairul Haque raised doubts. His decision to modify the open court’s initial order, as reflected in the full verdict issued 16 months after his retirement, was viewed by many as not just judicial misconduct but potentially bordering on forgery or fraud.
This conduct severely undermined the impartiality and integrity expected from the judiciary, leading to a significant erosion of public trust. There are lingering suspicions that the delay in issuing the full verdict may have been deliberate, allowing Sheikh Hasina to pass laws that circumvented the initial order and facilitated two additional elections under a different system. Sheikh Hasina took advantage of this situation to abolish the caretaker provision, disregarding even the recommendations of a parliamentary committee.
Critics also highlight allegations that Justice Haque sought financial aid from Prime Minister Hasina’s discretionary relief fund for his wife’s medical treatment while cases against the government were pending before his bench. This action, at the very least, suggests a compromising ethical stance. Additionally, concerns were raised about his appointments as chairman of the Law Commission, a position he held on a contractual basis long after retiring from the Supreme Court, despite his own ruling against judges holding “offices of profit” post-retirement.
While Justice Haque failed to secure a judgeship at the International Criminal Court (ICC) despite being nominated twice by the Hasina regime, his recent arrest on a murder charge has sparked mixed reactions. Some question the credibility of the murder charge, viewing it as a tactic to incarcerate individuals the authorities target. Others see his arrest as a form of vindication, holding him responsible for enabling Sheikh Hasina to manipulate and weaponize the judiciary, denying justice to opposition figures.
The lack of arrest in cases related to his controversial 13th Amendment verdict raises questions about judicial immunity and the application of legal protections for judges post-retirement. The experiences of Justice SK Sinha, who was harassed within court premises and eventually forced into exile after authoring a critical verdict nullifying the 16th Amendment, underscore the challenges faced by the judiciary in Bangladesh.
Urgent action is needed to restore public confidence in the judiciary. Bangladesh requires a justice system that operates independently from the executive, upholding transparency, integrity, and fairness. Judges should not face unjust prosecution or be compelled to flee their homeland, ensuring a judiciary free from external influence and interference.