Tue 18 Dec 2007
Based on the recent developments, the following has been updated. Please check at the bottom for the latest developments. This entry was first published on September 3rd.
- In a seminar namely ‘Judicial Reform and Independence of Judiciary’, held on August 11, the chief justice said ‘I want to assure the nation that we will come forward. The Supreme Court played a role in the past at the critical juncture of the nation. It is doing so at present and will do so in future to pull the nation out of mire.’
- Current president’s term expires on September 5th
- Army chief General Moeen U Ahmed visits the president Aug 22nd amid the DU crisis
- Rumours of chief justice getting the post of president after the expiration of Iajuddin’s term while critical political cases are pending with Supreme Court
- The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court (SC) on August 26th stayed the High Court (HC) orders granting Sheikh Hasina bail in two extortion cases until disposal of her writ petitions with the HC. In response to the government appeals seeking reversal of the HC orders, a full bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice M Ruhul Amin made the ruling that means no immediate prospect for her release from prison.
- On September 2nd Former minister Najmul Huda writes a six page hand written letter from jail, which was widely distributed to media, asking for a law to let the army chief become the President of the country
- Justice Mohammad Fazlul Karim, the senior most judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, gets appointed as chief justice on September 3rd in absence of Chief Justice M Ruhul Amin from September 8 to 16 or until he resumes his charge
- Sep: 4, 07: Barrister Mainul Hossain says President Iajuddin to continue to hold his position until next parliament sworns in.
- Sep: 5th, 07 Editor of a major daily, known to be backed by army, in a first page commentary, request Gen Moeen to take over presidency after the next election and after his retirement from army
- Oct: 16, 07:
“Many questions are lurking in many people’s minds, but time will give answers to all those questions… I have no desire to become president,” Gen Moeen told reporters at Bangladesh High Commission in London - Oct: 20, 07:
Keeping in the possibility open due to others’ requests, Moeen said in New York the remarks he made in London were wrongly quoted by the press. He said there he had only stated that he has no “intention” to become the president - Dec 15th, 07:
Quoting reliable sources, Amader Shoymoy predicts that Moeen U Ahmed will assume acting Presidency by March after retiring from the army
and after Dr. Iajuddin takes an early retirement due to his “personal committments”. It is also predicted that the supreme court guidance will be obtained to facilitate that. This will happen, they predict, because there will be requests from people all across the civil society for Moeen to assume Presidency. Translation available here.
Updated
He said the remarks he made in London were wrongly quoted by the press. He said there he had only stated that he has no “intention” to become the president.”My aim is to dedicate myself to ensuring well-being of the orphan and underprivileged children on respectful retirement from the army,” he said. Queried if he would change his decision if the people want, he said, “It’s all speculation. None gave me such proposals.”
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Anyone knows why the current chief justice is absent?
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Great news. Any chief justice who has sent Hasina and Khaleda should made president for life.
As for chief of staff of the army becoming the president, why bother getting a kick upstairs!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Barristr Huda’s new proposal recommending constitutional amendment or reform for presidency to the Army Chief as ex-officio, looks like a big joke by a jailed barrister.
He also said he is jailed and has been suffering as he once called two powerful ambassadors stupid. There is some logic in his statement otherwise, his name should not have topped the first list of 50 corrupted individuals and shouldn’t have the first victim of CTG’s anti-corruption drive.
Mr. Huda failed to put another suggestion that, not only presidency for Army Chief but also there should be a constitutional revision following the Turkey line. And that could make GMUA, a new ATATURK for Bangladesh.
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:39 pm
I feel like “LOL” when I hear the words due process and justice and constitution and human rights and al the other “bookish” terms that exists only in the books when we are talking about Bangladesh.
I remember in the days coming upto the 1/11 all the hoopla about how the constituion and how it should be upheld and all the “at-lamis” of the so called “sushil shomaj”. Doesn’t the presence of the military led/backed govt enough evidence itself that the consituion has been utterly raped and put down? When the most basic “Khaddo, Bostro,Bashosthan” it just seems that all these technicalitites about who might be the president seems rather trivial. At the end of the day its whoever omnipotent General chooses.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:30 pm
If the president has to be replaced, shouldn’t the chief justice be the best alternative. This culture of making chief justice controversial without any evidence is bad for the country.
September 3rd, 2007 at 7:08 pm
Tenure of the president
Harun Ur Rashid
The president is elected by members of Parliament, and holds office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters office. The powers and functions of the president are described in Articles 48 to 54 in Part IV of the Constitution.
The current president, Prof. Dr. Iajuddin Ahmed, assumed office on September 5, 2002. Accordingly, his five-year term expires on September 5 this year.
During the tenure of a non-party caretaker government (CTG), the president is invested with additional powers that are not available when an elected government runs the administration.
The president appoints the chief adviser (head of the government), and the CTG is collectively responsible to the president. During this interim administration, the defence portfolio comes directly under the president. The president is the only elected person when the non-elected advisers of the CTG run the administration.
At this juncture, the office of the president is very important. Some argue that his continuity in office is needed.
The question is whether he can continue in office until his successor is elected.
The simple answer lies in the Constitution in Article 50. For ready reference the Article is quoted below:
“50 (1): Subject to the provisions of the Constitution, the president shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office.
(2) Provided that notwithstanding the expiration of his term the president shall continue to hold office until his successor enters upon office.”
The sub-clause 2 provides a significant phrase “notwithstanding the expiration of his term” the current president shall continue until his successor enters upon office; the successor shall be elected by members of parliament.
It is argued that since there is no parliament, the question of election of a new president does not arise, and the incumbent can continue as president.
It means that when the parliament is constituted after the election at the end of 2008, the members will be eligible to elect the president. Until that time, the president continues in his office.
Precedents
In Turkey, the term of President Ahmet Necdet Sezer expired last May, and he was supposed to have stepped down, but he still remains in office because his successor could not be elected.
President Bush exercises his powers when he is overseas, and his presidential aircraft (Airforce One) becomes his office, a mini-White House. The vice-president does not take charge when the president is overseas. President Bush recently handed over charge to the vice-president for two hours when he went to hospital for colonoscopy under sedation.
What about the speaker?
A question arises about whether the speaker can assume of the office of the acting president. Again, the Constitution is very clear in Article 54 about the circumstances under which the speaker can become acting president.
Article 54 :”If a vacancy occurs in the office of the president, or if the president is unable to discharge the functions of his office on account of absence, illness, or any other cause, the speaker shall discharge those functions until a president is elected or until the president resumes the functions of his office, as the case may be.”
It is important to note that Article 54 speaks of the speaker “acting as president during his absence.” That means that the office of the president must first fall vacant before Article 54 is invoked. If there is no vacancy of that high office, Article 54 cannot be applicable.
For example, when the president went to Singapore in mid-July for a medical check up, the speaker did not automatically assume the office of acting president because there had been no vacancy in that high office. The president continued to discharge his functions.
During these days of advanced communication technologies, such as e-mail and video-conferencing etc, there is arguably no need for the president to relinquish his powers even when he is overseas, so long as he is healthy enough to exercise his powers. The former prime ministers continued in their offices when they visited overseas.
It is argued that the framers of the constitution thought it appropriate that there should not be any confusion or doubt about the continuity of the office of the president until his successor is duly elected, as specified in the Constitution. For continuity of the high office of the president, Article 50 (2) was inserted by the framers. There is no room for acting president because none of the conditions laid down in the Article 54 exists.
http://thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=2501
Barrister Harun ur Rashid is a former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva.
September 4th, 2007 at 5:38 am
Manush (6)
Thanks for posting the article by H. Rashid. The law appears to be pretty damn clear - Iajuddin will continue till a new President is sworn in. This ought to put an end to speculations as to who will be the President after Sept 5.
September 4th, 2007 at 5:54 am
Barrister Mainul:
‘A rose is known as a rose, no matter whatever you call it. Constitutionally, this is a caretaker government, and at the end of the day it is a government,’
Barrister Huda:
‘To ensure stability of the country, only one reform is necessary and that is to incorporate a provision in the constitution stipulating that the army chief will be the president of the country, Peace will prevail for all time if this formula is implemented, and the patriotic army will be able to make valuable contribution in times of national crisis without any formality or excuse,’
Which barrister is taunting and which one is serious?
September 4th, 2007 at 11:06 am
I sincerely hope that Barrister Huda is being sarcastic. Very sarcastic.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Some of the bloggers here are unfortuantely so reek with consipracy theories that in every move this CTG makes they find some smell of big conspiracy. It is declared that Iazuddin will contnue as President. There is no need to fabricate new consipracy theories just because the supreme court judicial bench canclled SH’s bail. Unfortunately, these bloggers are the same people who blame others for fabricating consipracy theory when someone said there could be hidden instigations from teachers and politicians for the student uprising and subsequent violences. All so much for the love for their beloved party/leader, but always coated with hiccup for democracy or human rights.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
no conspiracy theory was posted. there were a few events and quotes that were posted with corroboration and it was titled as president and chief justice watch. all of these happened within a month and the idea was to put some context to the whole discussion surrounding presidency. if nothing comes out of it, great. if some development happens, then you have a context. The commenters have gone on with their own conclusion. i will continue to update this entry as I see movements related to the presidency and the chief of judiciar, if any. none of them will be made up. no need to be sensitive. is it a case of ‘Thakur ghore kere’?
September 4th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
Agree with observer #10
September 4th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Good point Observer #10. Sometimes we over analyze things.
September 5th, 2007 at 12:10 am
Now time for plan B.
If anyone had any doudt about Amadershomoy’s allegiance, this ought to seal the deal.
Editor Naimur Islam Khan thinks having Gen. Moeen as President after his retirement is now “porishthitir dabi”.
Go figure!!
He has taken brownnosing to a new height.
http://www.amadershomoy.com/news.php?id=196747&sys=3
September 5th, 2007 at 5:43 am
#14 siraj
Not only Naimur, many other people (other than Huda) talking about sharing state power with military. I have read subeditorial hinting that in last few days. And you have to give it to Naim, he is carrying old baggage, case that made him leave the country for a while. What can he do? Go to remand? What can Mannan or Amu do? They have seen SH picked up after lecturing about DGFI.
Some corrupt people will pay the price by going to jail and few others by bootlicking. In response to the journalists, Mokhlesur Rahman (?), spokesman of Dudok, said “PROYOJON HOLE Ershad’r case o revive kora hobe”. Though I doubt that, after all there is a brotherhood of uniform. But the key point is “proyojon hole”!
September 5th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
In fact Naimul Islam Khan is not the lone ranger in army pampering. He is locked in a head to head battle with prothom Alo editor Motiur Rahman is military bootlicking.
Only difference what NIK says bluntly shamelessly, Mr Motiur Rahman says covertly. It started with Mr Rahman’s first post 1/11 commentary. That commentary was analyzed in this blog.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Nice analysis by DR Ayesha Siddiqa about our military backed CTG, the article came out in newage. Frightening part is that the military is getting support from the elites of the society.
[TALK to an average Bangladeshi about civil-military relations and they will tell you that their country is not like Pakistan and that they will never allow the military to take control of politics.
Unfortunately, in their eagerness not to be compared to Pakistan, the Bangladeshis have failed to notice that they are slowly creeping towards a situation subtly comparable to Pakistan and that if they are not careful the military would soon begin to play a decisive role in the country’s politics. They must also realise that the elite of any country might be as myopic as that of any other country and may push the country to political disaster.
Bangladesh started its transition to democracy in 1991 when public protests put an end to the rule of General Ershad who had taken over after the assassination of his predecessor General Ziaur Rahman. Since then, the army has not returned to politics. Bangladeshi political historians always forget the botched coup attempt of 1996 when Generals Naseem and Hilal Murshad conspired to take over. Had the military been fully professional then, which means tightly organised as a hierarchy, it would have managed to take control of the government. The fact that the conspiring generals did not have good communication channels with the battalion guarding Dhaka and could not convince some generals to move from strategic positions saved the country. So, in 1996, there were elements in the army who had the ambition to gain power.
However, the civilian rulers entered into an informal partnership with the military according to which the government would ensure the military’s interest in return for the latter staying out of politics. This arrangement could be managed because the armed forces were not completely professional. The legacy of the Bangladeshi military is a mix of freedom fighters and officers repatriated from the United Pakistan armed forces. The friction between the two schools of thought did not allow for the kind of consolidation of perception and interests which would result in building up of a praetorian military. The officer cadre was further enticed into submission through the opportunities gained from participating in the UN peace keeping missions. Apart from the defence budget, the military depends on the UN to obtain resources for the gratification of its personnel.
Some of the UN money was later reinvested in exploring other possibilities for economic expansion by the armed forces. The Bangladeshi military has used some of this money as venture capital and established stakes in business and industry which is also a carry forward from the pre-1971 Fauji Foundation.
Since the past ten years, there have been three developments in Bangladesh which have had an impact on its politics.
First, the military has consolidated its corporate ethos and culture which means that the organisation is building cohesion within itself which it lacked earlier. Along with this, the military has also become more conscious of its interests, which includes personal stakes of the officer cadre. For a military which was basically meant to provide security against external threat to Bangladesh, the bulk has now become engaged in the UN peacekeeping missions. Whether peacekeeping missions are the core task of a professional military is a moot point.
Second, a gap has emerged between the people and the political leadership. The politicians have become more intensely authoritarian and myopic in their thinking. Such a transformation is not new but dates back to the times soon after the country was born. However, the predatory instinct of the politicians has intensified resulting in policies which would destabilise the country.
Third, there is the development of an equally predatory middle class which is willing to use the military as a secondary partner to change the current political arrangement. Since the Bangladeshi political system is patronage-based, the common man is not able to look beyond Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia. The problem of the educated middle class, on the other hand, is that while it is not willing to ‘soil their hands’ in the ‘dirty game of politics,’ they would like to take power away from these two female leaders. Resultantly, the educated middle class is quite happy to use the military and unfair political means to change the domestic scene.
For instance, while making a speech in Canberra the Bangladeshi advisor on foreign affairs claimed that the caretaker setup in the country denoted the rule of ‘Baudhulouk.’ This term means educated and more capable; it was traditionally used by the Calcutta elite to refer to themselves. The underlying message of the gentleman, which more or less represents the perception of the educated middle class, is that there are new groups which are ready to replace the old leadership. Since mass politics is too dirty a game, these new power aspirants will use unfair means and the military to negotiate power. These people would rather have military help them with some rigging than let Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khalrda Zia return to power.
Surely, the two ladies must share their part of the blame for letting things come to this point. The misuse of power and ill-conceived policies rarely bring fruit. For example, the BNP strategically encouraged the Jamaat and other religious extremist factions to their own advantage. Interestingly, Khaleda Zia was not the only beneficiary of cultivating religious extremism. The military benefited both directly and indirectly. A more rightist society is bound to be more nationalistic in a narrow sense.
However, the problem is that using the military is never a good option. This is not an organisation which can be trusted to remain a junior partner once the civilian policymakers and stakeholders begin to use it to gain power.
Pakistan’s example is a case in point. The 1958 coup by the civil bureaucracy was not meant to bring in the military. But once General Ayub decided to take over power, there was nothing which could stop him. Sadly, we are still unable to check the military from gaining power.
Any Bangladeshi might argue that their armed forces and society are different. They will not let the military rule for long nor will the army try to come into power directly. There are two points which are worth making.
First, the army does not necessarily have to come directly into power. The organisation could become influential while remaining in the back seat and yet constantly destabilise politics.
Second, the Bangladeshi ruling elite is no different from any other, especially when we look at the manner in which it has sought to use authoritarianism and military force to its own advantage. They, like any other short-sighted and predatory elite, have completely forgotten that people are not to be taken for a ride. Too much tempering with the masses, the propensity to use extra-constitutional methods for transfer of power, and inability to deliver services to the public leads to a certain disenchantment amongst the common people. The people no longer take active interest in politics nor do they offer their lives to stand up for right against wrong; in any case, after a while, they are unable to tell the difference.
The Bangladeshi state and society at this point is very close to getting on the track of Pakistan’s politics. Its elite and middle class must evaluate the advantage of using short-term versus long-term perspective to life and politics.]
December 18th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
can someone pls tell us more about Naimul Islam Khan’s ‘baggage’? Why did he have to leave the country? What was the case? Ppl who make comments, ektu jhere kashun. So what about him?