The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court will deliver its verdict on November 20 on several appeals seeking restoration of the non-party caretaker government system for national elections.
A seven-member bench headed by chief justice Syed Refaat Ahmed fixed the date on Tuesday, after concluding 10th days of hearings on review petitions filed by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, Sushasoner Jonno Nagorik, and several others, including Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, challenging the 2011 verdict that scrapped the caretaker system.
The court began hearing the fresh appeals on October 21, following its August 26 decision allowing five eminent citizens to file a petition after the ouster of the Sheikh Hasina-led Awami League government on August 5, 2024.
Attorney general Md Asaduzzaman argued that the 2011 judgment was flawed and delivered by the then chief justice ABM Khairul Haque in ignorance of key constitutional principles.
He said that the verdict declaring the 13th amendment unconstitutional was 鈥榩er incuriam鈥� and should be reviewed.
He told the court that justice Khairul Haque and four other judges had altered the short order on the caretaker government system 16 months after it was pronounced, violating judicial procedures 鈥� an act that could amount to a criminal offence under Section 219 of the Penal Code.
The attorney general said the caretaker government system was designed to safeguard citizens鈥� rights, ensure fair elections, and strengthen democracy.
He argued that any constitutional interpretation that ignores people鈥檚 democratic rights is a 鈥榤isconception of constitutional interpretation.鈥�
The 2011 Appellate Division verdict annulled the caretaker government provision.
However, the written judgment released in 2012, after his retirement, omitted earlier oral observations that allowed the next two elections under a caretaker system.
Justice Md Wahhab Miah, one of the seven judges who heard the case, later said the written verdict did not match the short order announced in open court.
The verdict was passed by a narrow 4鈥�3 majority, raising questions about its legitimacy and democratic implications.