Judicial council verdict implemented

Nevertheless, some questions have arisen due largely to the delay in implementing the verdict of the supreme judicial council which it reached expeditiously. President Iajuddin Ahmed responded to the investigation report and recommendation of the council by sending it to the Prime Minister's Office for approval via the law ministry on January 26. However, the disposal of the matter took a long time as the file lay at the prime minister's office for nearly three months. How independent is the highest judicial body from the executive in the exercise of its writs? It appears to be hemmed in on all sides and the government's dithering on an issue of grave public concern could not have escaped the notice of most people. The government has finally done what was expected of it, but it could have done so more quickly thereby helping the judicial council to set its maiden precedent with a great impact.

Regrettably enough, the judge in question did not feel it a moral obligation to resign when the Supreme Council had delivered its verdict against him. There was another lamentable aspect. The disgraced judge was facing defalcation charges brought by the Bar Association before he was appointed an additional judge to the High Court Division. Now, the charge was serious enough not to have influenced the government's decision to appoint him in the first place. But his rather shady background was apparently overlooked by the decision makers -- a lapse that could lend credence to the skeptical view that politicisation did not spare even the highest judiciary. All the same, the removal of the judge has gone down well as a potential deterrent against defiling of the sacrosanct institution by any corrupt elements.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source