Fracas in court premises

The lawyers seemed to have got caught in the crossfire of right to boycott and right to resist. If one wants to boycott the court, then why should he be resisted from doing so? On the other hand, if such boycott makes the court dysfunctional, then one should protest it too. But why physical confrontation? How could a lawyer get to physically assaulting his peers and that also at the very place that is considered to be the seat of law? Here the practitioners of law broke the law. And what we saw in this case is that litigation interests were sidetracked especially at a time when there is a huge backlog of cases.

The sharp political division between the lawyers has contributed largely to this sordid display of disrespect for one another. It has gone to such a level that they can't even stand on one platform for safeguarding their own interests. Such hard political positioning on issues that affect the profession is simply not acceptable. It only creates uncertainty, instability and confusion. We don't expect such confrontational attitude from the lawyers simply because they are in a profession which is not only highly respected but also the last resort for those who seek justice. On a matter of principle concerning the appointment and promotion of judges, we believe that the recommendations of the Chief Justice should hold good. We recall that this practice was followed during Ziaur Rahman's presidency and Khaleda Zia's premiership earlier on.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source