THE judiciary appears to be in need of an urgent course correction as it appears to have shifted its standing with the change in the government. And, such a shift questions the independence of the judiciary that was officially effected on November 1, 2007 from the executive and the legislative based a 12-point directive that the Appellate Division issued on December 2, 1999. But, the independence of the judiciary continues to be questioned in its functioning because of a dual control by the law ministry and the Supreme Court. And, such tussles have stopped the development of professionalism. There were dozens of politicians 鈥� arrested during the authoritarian regime of the Awami League government that had been in office for consecutive tenures since 2009 until August 5, when the deposed prime minister fled the country after resignation 鈥� who the court repeatedly remanded in custody when they sought to be remanded on bail and, that too, in cases where the arrested needed the bail for serious medical treatment. But the court readily remanded dozens of such people on bail soon after the Awami League government had been overthrown through a student-led mass uprising out of protests that spanned for the month of July and the first four and a half days of August.
The court鈥檚 considering some eligible for remand on bail with a change in the government after having considered them ineligible for remand on bail earlier 鈥� even after repeated prayers for bail in some cases 鈥� shows that the judiciary is not free of political control. The court changed its standing on such issues in a similar manner in the past during changes in the government. Whilst it is clear that the executive has never decisively attended to the issue of the independence of the judiciary, keeping control of a sort, the court has also grown on the habit of bowing to such control. Legal experts have always blamed successive governments, presided over mostly by the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, for keeping the judiciary subservient to the executive, noting that they have found no reflection of the 2007 event on an independent functioning of the judiciary. Judges are also appointed to the High Court almost always on political considerations. But the judiciary needs to run independently as it needs to ensure justice impartially and expeditiously. But the Supreme Court has, as many believe, been left in a position where it almost cannot make any decision on the judiciary. In the course of time, it has become difficult to make the judiciary functionally independent as it still has no secretariat of its own and it is still dependent on the executive for the pay scale, funds and budget. General expectations were that all such problems in the judiciary would be resolved after its independence. But, that has not happened. And, it is bad for the country, the nation, the people and the judiciary.
The judiciary must, therefore, learn how to run independently, coming out of the habit of giving in to the pressure of the executive. This almost subjugation of a sort that the court must break through.