Why policy should not be formulated over imposition of death penalty: HC

The High Court has issued a rule asking why policy should not be formulated in case of imposition of death penalty.

The court also asked as to why the imposition of 'death penalty' as a punishment without general guidelines will not conflict with some articles of the Constitution.

An HC bench of Justice Mustafa Zaman Islam and Justice Md. Atabullah passed the order on Tuesday, responding to e writ petition filed by Supreme Court lawyer Ishrat Hasan.

Earlier on December 7, the lawyer filed the petition challenging the existing provision of death penalty.

Secretaries of Law and Justice Division, Legislative and Parliamentary Affairs Division and Registrar General of the Supreme Court were made respondents to the petition.

The HC bench asked why the imposition of death penalty without guidelines should not be declared in conflict with some (7, 27, 31, 32 and 35) articles of the Constitution and why guidelines should not be made in the case of handing down death penalty, Ishrat said.

A directive was also sought to issue a rule as to why the provision of capital punishment should not be declared illegal and unlawful.

According to the petition, the death penalty is the highest punishment of Bangladesh, but it is contradictory to sections 32 and 35 of the country's constitution.

Moreover, the death penalty was discouraged in the 'UN Convention on Human Rights-1948', 'International Convention on Civil and Political Rights-1966' and 'Convention against Torture-1984'.

As Bangladesh is a signatory member country of the laws, hence there is an obligation to prohibit the death penalty. A total of 112 countries of the world have already banned capital punishment, the petition said.

As Bangladesh is a signatory to the international laws banning the death penalty and the country is bound to abide by the section 25 of the constitution as per the International Law.