The proposed constitutional amendment seeking to restore parliament's authority to remove Supreme Court (SC) judges might make the judicial process vulnerable to partisan influence leading to politically-induced culture of impunity and miscarriage of justice.
"The judicial process may be vulnerable to partisan influence leading to politically-induced culture of impunity on one hand and miscarried justice on the other," Executive Director of Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) Dr Iftekharuzzaman told UNB.
Asked about the risk if parliament gets back the power to remove judges, Dr Zaman said the risk is about undermining the judicial independence, integrity and objectivity, as a result of which the prospect of the rule of law and justice may be exposed to newer challenges.
The TIB chief said the proposed amendment has been facing opposition primarily of widespread perception of its possible abuse in the context of ever-growing menace of zero-sum political culture in Bangladesh.
Dr Zaman said as much as the judiciary is the key pillar for the rule of law and accountability in democracy, like any other institution, its own accountability also lies with people exercised through their representatives in parliament.
"Accordingly, the government initiative to return to the 1972 Constitution through the 16th Amendment can be viewed as logical, and conceptually valid," he added.
However, the vision, spirit and expectation of political behaviour and democratic practice with which the 1972 constitution, particularly the provision of accountability of judges to parliament, was enshrined and have been exposed to challenges and erosions, he added.
The TIB chief said the politics of confrontation, power-game, mutual hatred and unacceptability of political opponent have over the years risen to such an extent that key institutions of democracy have been deeply politicised and converted into monopolised territory of the party and allies in power.
Responding to another question, he said although the legality of the present parliament cannot be challenged, the extraordinary level of controversy around the election by which the 10th Shangsad came into being does give credence to the question whether the moral and political credibility needed for such a substantive amendment is available.
"To compensate this, the government can serve its own cause better if it welcomes and indeed by itself facilitates assessment of public opinion on the subject," he added.
"Taking our political realities into consideration, there may be options in between absolute authority and none to parliament, be that as partisan a body as we seem to be destined to live with for many more years to come," he said.
