A High Court bench on Monday sent a writ petition that challenged the legality of the Supreme Judicial Appointment Council to the chief justice to assign the matter to another bench as it was embarrassed to hear the petition.
The petition was moved before the bench of Justice AKM Asaduzzaman and Justice Syed Enayet Hossain.
Justice AKM Asaduzzaman refused to hear the petition as he is a member of the Supreme Judicial Appointment Council.
Supreme Court lawyer Ajmol Hossain Khokon filed the writ petition, questioning four key provisions of the Supreme Court Judge Appointment Ordinance 2025, promulgated on January 21.
The challenged provisions include the establishment of the council, the designation of the Supreme Court registrar general as the council鈥檚 secretary, the council鈥檚 authority to recommend candidates for High Court and Appellate Division judges, and the selection process for Appellate Division judges.
The petitioner argued that the ordinance imposed a minimum age requirement of 45 years for applicants for the posts of Supreme Court judges, which contradicted the constitution.
The constitution requires a candidate to have at least 10 years of legal practice to qualify as a High Court judge, but no minimum age limit.
He also contended that the council created two categories of candidates for the Supreme Court judge, introducing a classification not recognised by the constitution.
The council lacks elected representatives, as neither the Supreme Court Bar Association nor the Bangladesh Bar Council has any say in the process, the petitioner also argued.
The ordinance was promulgated by the president upon the recommendation of a commission tasked with reforming the constitution and the judiciary.
It aligns with chief justice Syed Refaat Ahmed鈥檚 roadmap for judicial reform and fulfills a long-pending constitutional requirement introduced by the fifth amendment to the constitution in 1978.