The High Court on Monday rejected a writ petition challenging the legality of the president鈥檚 reference to the Supreme Court and the subsequent Appellate Division opinion on the formation of an interim government after the overthrow of the Sheikh Hasina-led regime on August 5, 2024 amid a student-led mass uprising.
The bench of Justice Fatema Najib and Justice Sikder Mahmudur Razi summarily dismissed the petition filed by Supreme Court lawyer Mohammad Mohsen Rashid, ruling that the formation of the interim government on August 8, 2024, was lawful.
The High Court upheld the procedural validity of the president鈥檚 actions and the Appellate Division鈥檚 opinion, which had been issued on August 8, 2024, after a virtual hearing of attorney general Md Asaduzzaman earlier that day.
The bench also noted that notifying the attorney general before the hearing was consistent with established procedures.
Petitioner Mohsen Rashid argued that the appointment of Md Asaduzzaman as attorney general by the president prior to the formation of the interim government was unconstitutional.
The High Court also ruled there was no illegality in appointing the attorney general.
Mohsen alleged that the law adviser and then chief justice Obaidul Hassan, along with the Supreme Court registrar, avoided responding to notices related to the reference.
He further claimed that no proper court hearing was held regarding the president鈥檚 reference and alleged that a document supporting the Appellate Division鈥檚 opinion was drafted under duress.
According to his submission, the document was prepared by bureaucrats on the instruction of the law adviser and sent to the residences of judges for their signatures on August 8.
Additional attorney general Aneek R Haque, representing the state, dismissed the allegations and argued that the president鈥檚 actions and the Appellate Division鈥檚 opinion were lawful and constitutionally compliant.
The interim government was formed to address a power vacuum created after the deposition of Sheikh Hasina who subsequently fled the country following the mass uprising, the Appellate Division鈥檚 opinions mentioned in the reference.
The president sought the Appellate Division鈥檚 opinion to ensure constitutional adherence, which paved the way for the government鈥檚 formation on August 8.
