SC approves to file appeal against verdict canceling caretaker govt

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court has granted permission to file an appeal against the verdict that abolished Bangladesh’s caretaker government system. A full bench of seven judges, headed by Chief Justice Syed Refaat Ahmed, issued the order on Wednesday. The court has fixed October 21 for the hearing.

The development came during the second day of a review hearing on the matter. Observing the gravity of the issue, the Chief Justice said the court does not intend to propose a temporary fix by reinstating the caretaker system. Instead, the Appellate Division is seeking a “permanent and effective” solution to prevent repeated disruptions in the democratic process.

“If the caretaker government is brought back, from when will it be effective?” the Chief Justice asked during the hearing, raising concerns about the practical implications of such a move.

Responding to the court’s queries, Attorney General Md. Asaduzzaman stated that the Appellate Division may consider offering a new interpretation on the reintroduction of the system. He was invited by the bench to respond to several key questions regarding the review petition.

During his submission, the Attorney General painted a grim picture of the past decade and a half, claiming that the people of the country have been subjected to oppression rather than governance. “Enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and political persecution have become common. Institutions that once ensured justice have been dismantled,” he said.

He further asserted that these circumstances fueled a mass uprising which led to the fall of the Awami League. “It was the streets that decided who would be the Chief Justice and who would lead the government. The people’s mandate cannot be ignored. Disregarding it invites revolution,” he warned, referring to the context of the 1990 popular uprising.

The caretaker government system was originally introduced through the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in 1996. However, its constitutionality was later challenged in the High Court by Advocate M. Salim Ullah and two other lawyers.

The outcome of the upcoming appeal hearing is expected to have significant political and constitutional implications ahead of the next general elections.