Commission proposes major changes, experts urge caution

The Judicial Reform Commission has submitted a report containing several significant recommendations, including the establishment of a separate judicial secretariat, the formation of a permanent attorney service, expediting the judicial process, the creation of an independent commission for judge appointments, setting the minimum age for High Court judges at 48, and the establishment of permanent High Court benches in all administrative divisions. According to sources from the Law Ministry, the report has recently been submitted to the Law and Justice Division. The report is scheduled to be officially presented to Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus on February 8.

Earlier, on January 15, the Constitution Reform Commission also included several recommendations for judicial reform in its final report to the Chief Adviser. However, legal experts have urged caution regarding some of these proposed reforms.

Key Proposals in the Judicial Reform Report

According to ministry sources, the Judicial Reform Commission has made several major recommendations, including:

Decentralization of the High Court and lower courts, meaning the establishment of High Court benches at the divisional level and civil and criminal courts at the Upazila level.

Reforming the process of appointing High Court judges, introducing stricter disciplinary measures for judicial appointments, and forming a Supreme Judicial Council for the removal of judges.

Revising the syllabus for the Bar Council examinations and incorporating necessary legal subjects.

Establishing a Bar Council-administered Institute for Lawyer Training, requiring newly enrolled lawyers to undergo a six-month training program.

Reforming the Bar Council Order of 1972 and increasing the number of enrollment committee members.

Expanding the activities of district legal aid offices.

Enacting a separate law for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).

Amending the Code of Civil Procedure to reduce case backlog.

Creating an independent commission for judicial appointments, excluding the Chief Justice from the appointment process.

Preventing conflicts of interest in appointing Supreme Court judges, by ensuring that two High Court judges, the Attorney General, the Supreme Court Bar Association president, and Supreme Court lawyers are not included in the appointment committee.

Establishing a permanent attorney service and accelerating the judicial process.

Setting the minimum age for High Court judges at 48 years.

Establishing permanent High Court benches in all administrative divisions.


The report also recommends expanding the National Legal Aid Services Organization (NLASO) to provide broader legal assistance, mediation, and dispute resolution services, ensuring that mediation activities become more efficient.

Experts Express Concerns Over Certain Proposals

Most legal experts have welcomed the proposals. However, some have raised concerns about certain recommendations, warning that they could negatively impact the judiciary or face constitutional challenges.

High Court Benches in Every Division May Be Unconstitutional

Senior Supreme Court lawyer Barrister Akhtar Imam told Views Bangladesh:
"The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution previously established permanent High Court benches in six divisions. However, both the High Court and the Appellate Division later struck down this provision. If this proposal is revived, it will undoubtedly face constitutional challenges."

Barrister Kaiser Kamal, BNP’s Legal Affairs Secretary, echoed similar concerns:
"Establishing a High Court bench in each division would be contempt of court, as both divisions of the Supreme Court have already ruled against it. Additionally, excluding legal professionals from the judicial appointment process is not practical."

Senior Supreme Court lawyer Manzill Murshid criticized the proposal to set the minimum age for High Court judges at 48, stating:
"If a lawyer has not gained sufficient legal expertise by the age of 48, then appointing them as a judge may not result in a competent judiciary."

Senior Supreme Court lawyer Ahsanul Karim disagreed with the proposal to exclude certain legal professionals from the judicial appointment committee, stating:
"The recommendation to remove two High Court judges, the Attorney General, the Supreme Court Bar Association president, and Supreme Court lawyers from the appointment committee is incorrect. These individuals have the best knowledge of which judges are most qualified for the Appellate Division, and they should be included to ensure transparency in appointments."

Government to Decide on Implementation

Justice Farid Ahmed Shibli, a retired High Court judge and a member of the Reform Commission, told Views Bangladesh:
"The Judicial Reform Commission has submitted its report to the Law Ministry. The full report will be presented to the Chief Adviser on Wednesday. The government will then decide which recommendations will be implemented."

Formation of the Judicial Reform Commission

The interim government formed the Judicial Reform Commission on October 3 to ensure an independent, impartial, and effective judiciary. The commission is led by former Appellate Division judge Shah Abu Nayeem Mominur Rahman and includes the following members:

Justice Emdadul Haque (Retired High Court judge and former District and Sessions Judge)

Justice Farid Ahmed Shibli (Retired High Court judge and former District and Sessions Judge)

Syed Aminul Islam (Former District and Sessions Judge and former Registrar of the Supreme Court)

Majdar Hossain (Former District and Sessions Judge and petitioner in the landmark Mazdar Hossain v. State case)

Tanim Hossain Shaon (Senior Advocate, Supreme Court)

Kazi Mahfuzul Haque (Supon) (Associate Professor, Department of Law, University of Dhaka)

A student representative

As the government reviews these proposals, legal experts, lawmakers, and stakeholders await its final decision on the future of judicial reform in Bangladesh.