Promotions of judges in the offing, sans rules

High-Court
High-Court

There have been no rules or regulations over the past 45 years pertaining to the promotions of judges. There is no competitive method or even provision for interviews in place. The promotions are simply based on the annual confidential report or ACR. As a result, as in the case of transfers, promotions too are impacted by various irregularities and complications.

Under these prevailing circumstances, next month over a hundred additional district judges will be promoted to the rank of district judge in the absence of any official regulations. After five years these promoted individuals will be given the scale of a secretary.

The law ministry last September sent the names of 148 additional district judges to the Supreme Court for promotion. Among them, 14 had been promoted from the rank of joint district judge less than two years ago. And two among the 148 had been removed on corruption charges. The promotion of two has been finalised and awaiting the president’s nod.

Even in 2007 it took six years for promotion from the rank of additional district judge. Yet at present, there are 34 persons less than two to three years as additional district judge and 89 in that rank for three to four years, who are now placed in the panel for district judge. There are persons with 10 to 14 years of experience too, yet they are only eight in number.

The appointment of such a massive number of district judges in one go is unprecedented. Many of those who work with the judiciary fear that these promotions will create complications in the administration. The 1972 constitution even had provision for appointing district judges from among experienced lawyers at the district level. Two individuals became judges under this provision. One was former chief justice (2001-02) Mahmudul Amin Chowdhury. The other was a lawyer from Bogra, Mujibur Rahman. He later became state minister for finance in the BNP government.

Justice Mahmudul Amin Chowdhury feels that the 1972 provision should be reintroduced. He also feels that at first the recently retired district judges should be reappointed to untangle the jam of cases in the courts.

Former law minister Shafiq Ahmed told Prothom Alo that the question remained as to how judicious it would be to promote relatively less experienced persons to the position of district judge simply because there were vacancies. He also strongly supported the reintroduction of the 1972 provision, saying that many skilled lawyers at the district level would be eager to join the lower courts. He said since the government had agreed to extend the age limit of judges by two years, the experience of the retired judges could be put to use by giving them contractual appointment.

A former chief justice yesterday told Prothom Alo that the women and children repression prevention tribunal should be conducted by an additional district judge, not a district judge. Meanwhile, former cabinet secretary Ali Imam Majumdar pointed out that a list of 40 names is always ready for appointment as deputy commissioner, but no such list exists for appointment of district judges.

The district judge is the highest position in the Bangladesh judicial service, yet individuals never have to face any government committee or high court judges for promotion to that post.

Deputation: Judges eager to stay in Dhaka are more interested in being placed on deputation in the ministry or for administrative work at the Supreme Court. There are no regulations in this regard either.

The Chhattisgarh high court in India fixes the term for appointments on deputation at four years, with an additional year under special circumstances. Bangladesh has no such rule.

A total of 38 judges can remain on deputation with the law ministry. There are eight vacant posts, six in the solicitors’ wing and two in the administration. The officials say that their recommendations to fill these vacant posts are lying with the Supreme Court. There are presently 21 officials on deputation at the Supreme Court.

Read more:

Transfer of judges bone of contention

Law minister 'begs to differ' with chief justice

Article 116 behind sluggish judiciary: CJ


The article originally published in Bengali in Prothom Alo print edition is rewritten in English by Ayesha Kabir