Ershad's military regime illegal: SC
Dhaka, May 15 (bdnews24.com)—The Supreme Court has upheld the High Court (HC) order declaring illegal the Seventh Amendment to the constitution that had legimatised the autocratic regime of military strongman Hussein Muhammad Ershad.
The Appellate Division (AD) on Sunday, however, cancelled a portion of the HC order upholding the military court verdict against Siddique Ahmed, a resident of Chittagong upon whose petition the HC order came in August last year.
A six-member AD bench, headed by outgoing chief justice A B M Khairul Haque, also declared the military court verdict against Ahmed illegal. Ahmed was convicted of murder during Ershad's martial law period.
The AD gave the orders following a petition filed by Ahmed against part of the HC order. He filed the petition on Apr 11 and the chamber judge later sent it to the Appellate Division.
The apex court selected four senior lawyers as amici curiae for the hearing of the appeal. Of them, Rafiq-ul Haque, Mahmudul Islam and Mohammad Amir-Ul Islam gave their onions to the court, but Ajmalul Hossain could not as he was abroad.
The High Court verdict said the military rule imposed by Hussein Muhammad Ershad on Mar 24, 1982, all the military ordinances passed since then to Nov 11, 1986, chief military law administrator's orders, martial law order and directions were illegal.
It also had declared illegal the regimes of Khondker Moshtaq Ahmed, Abu Sa'adat Mohammad Sayem and Ziaur Rahman between Aug 15, 1975 and 1979.
The court, though, pardoned the activities of Ershad that may come under the verdict on the Fifth Amendment to avoid chaos.
It, however, let off those decisions that were taken in people's interest. The verdict added that, in the future, parliament can fix the punishment for the power usurpers.
The BNP-led coalition government had appealed for a stay order on the verdict, but the ruling Awami League-led government withdrew the appeal.
On Feb 2 last year, the Appellate Division also dismissed an appeal challenging the Aug 29, 2005 High Court verdict that had declared the Fifth Amendment illegal.
Dhaka, May 15 (bdnews24.com)—The Supreme Court has upheld the High Court (HC) order declaring illegal the Seventh Amendment to the constitution that had legimatised the autocratic regime of military strongman Hussein Muhammad Ershad.
The Appellate Division (AD) on Sunday, however, cancelled a portion of the HC order upholding the military court verdict against Siddique Ahmed, a resident of Chittagong upon whose petition the HC order came in August last year.
A six-member AD bench, headed by outgoing chief justice A B M Khairul Haque, also declared the military court verdict against Ahmed illegal. Ahmed was convicted of murder during Ershad's martial law period.
The AD gave the orders following a petition filed by Ahmed against part of the HC order. He filed the petition on Apr 11 and the chamber judge later sent it to the Appellate Division.
The apex court selected four senior lawyers as amici curiae for the hearing of the appeal. Of them, Rafiq-ul Haque, Mahmudul Islam and Mohammad Amir-Ul Islam gave their onions to the court, but Ajmalul Hossain could not as he was abroad.
The High Court verdict said the military rule imposed by Hussein Muhammad Ershad on Mar 24, 1982, all the military ordinances passed since then to Nov 11, 1986, chief military law administrator's orders, martial law order and directions were illegal.
It also had declared illegal the regimes of Khondker Moshtaq Ahmed, Abu Sa'adat Mohammad Sayem and Ziaur Rahman between Aug 15, 1975 and 1979.
The court, though, pardoned the activities of Ershad that may come under the verdict on the Fifth Amendment to avoid chaos.
It, however, let off those decisions that were taken in people's interest. The verdict added that, in the future, parliament can fix the punishment for the power usurpers.
The BNP-led coalition government had appealed for a stay order on the verdict, but the ruling Awami League-led government withdrew the appeal.
On Feb 2 last year, the Appellate Division also dismissed an appeal challenging the Aug 29, 2005 High Court verdict that had declared the Fifth Amendment illegal.
__._,_.___
