Khaleda Zia’s treatment abroad: Lawyers brush off govt talk of legal complications
The government is discussing potential legal complications concerning the permission to allow BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia to go abroad for better treatment. BNP asserts that the government has initiated a legal debate on the matter for political reasons.
However, many Supreme Court lawyers believe that since Khaleda Zia was released with a suspension of sentence via an executive order, the government can grant permission for her to travel abroad without involving the court.
Nevertheless, Law Minister Anisul Huq does not agree with this interpretation. He informed Prothom Alo on Monday that the government is not responsible for authorising Khaleda Zia's departure abroad.
Khaleda Zia has been receiving treatment at Evercare Hospital in Dhaka and is in critical condition for over a month and a half. The designated medical board overseeing her case has been strongly recommending that she be taken abroad for a liver transplant for an extended period.
Khaleda Zia's personal physician, AZM Zahid Hossain, informed Prothom Alo that her heart and kidney complications have worsened due to liver cirrhosis. Her health fluctuates, with moments of improvement followed by deteriorations, necessitating constant and intensive care.
Given the lack of improvement in her physical condition, Khaleda Zia's family and the BNP have raised the issue of sending her abroad for superior medical treatment. Last week, BNP leader Shamim Iskander, Khaleda Zia's younger brother, talked with Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan regarding this matter. Sources from Khaleda Zia's family reported that no assurance was given in response.
Statements by various ministers
In recent days, several concerned ministers have made various statements regarding the issue. On Saturday, Law Minister Anisul Huq stated that there had been no application from Khaleda Zia's family requesting permission for her to go abroad. On the same day, the Home Minister informed reporters that the Home Ministry was not involved in this matter, emphasising that it falls within the court's jurisdiction.
In light of these statements by the ministers, Khaleda Zia's lawyers released a copy of the application to journalists, which was submitted to the Ministry of Home Affairs on 5 September, seeking permission for her to travel abroad.
Following this, the Law Minister informed reporters yesterday that the application did indeed include the request to allow Khaleda Zia to go abroad, and this request was presented in conjunction with an application seeking an extension of the suspension period for Khaleda Zia's sentence. The application was disposed of by granting a six-month extension.
Law Minister Anisul Huq informed Prothom Alo that the government had suspended Khaleda Zia's sentence for six months through an executive order. If this suspension is revoked, she would return to her prior state, raising additional considerations.
He emphasised that pursuing legal action through the court at this moment would be futile. The law minister highlighted the legal complexities surrounding the matter.
Senior lawyers’ legal interpretation
Senior Supreme Court lawyer Shahdeen Malik disagreed with the Law Minister's statement. Yesterday, he informed Prothom Alo that, according to section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the government granted conditional release to Khaleda Zia through an executive order. Consequently, there is no question of her going to jail or requiring court intervention.
Section 401 explicitly states that an executive order can grant conditional release. The government even has the authority to waive the sentence. Therefore, he believes the government can provide an unconditional release, permitting Khaleda Zia to travel abroad.
Shahdeen Malik noted that various statements are generating a legal controversy in this matter.
Khurshid Alam, the lawyer for the Anti-Corruption Commission, informed Prothom Alo that the Appellate Division had rejected Khaleda Zia's bail application. However, the government released Khaleda Zia on humanitarian grounds without the consent of the court. Consequently, the decision about allowing her to go abroad rests with the government.
Senior advocate ZI Khan Panna also provided a similar explanation. He conveyed to Prothom Alo that the suspension and release of Khaleda Zia's sentence were not ordered by the court; rather, the government executed these actions through an executive order. Therefore, when the ministers now discuss the court's jurisdiction, that statement is inaccurate. He emphasised that it is a matter for the government to consider.
Family awaits nod from the top level of the govt
Khaleda Zia's family and her lawyers also do not want to go to court over permission to receive medical treatment abroad. They believe that legal complications are being deliberately created for political motives.
Kayser Kamal, Khaleda Zia's lawyer, conveyed to Prothom Alo that they remain hopeful the government will grant permission for Khaleda Zia's overseas treatment based on the previously submitted application.
A member of Khaleda Zia's family stated that they are currently awaiting any indication from the Prime Minister. They believe that sending Khaleda Zia abroad for improved medical treatment is imperative to ensure her well-being. They urge the government to consider this critical situation.
Former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia's suspended sentence was extended by six months, and this extension took effect on Monday. The government initially suspended her sentence and released her on a conditional basis for six months on 24 March 2020, at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, in response to her family's plea. Since then, her release period has been extended eight times.
Khaleda Zia was sentenced to five years on 8 February 2018 in the Zia Orphanage Trust corruption case. She remained imprisoned for nearly two years from that day.
Later, the sentence was increased to 10 years by the High Court. In addition to this, Khaleda Zia received another seven-year sentence in the Zia Charitable Trust corruption case.