President rejects SC proposal for disciplinary rules for lower judiciary [ Tritiyo Matra News ]

President rejects SC proposal for disciplinary rules for lower judiciary

Local December 12, 2016

President Md Abdul Hamid on Sunday rejected disciplinary rules for the lower court judges, proposed by the Supreme Court, describing them as ‘unnecessary.’
The president said that there was no need to notify the rules in the official gazette, according to a notice of the law ministry posted on its website.
The president conveyed the decision when officials placed the disciplinary rules before him seeking his order to get them published in the gazette, law and justice division secretary ASSM Zahirul Haque told New Age.
Summoned by the Appellate Division, two secretaries of the law ministry are scheduled to personally appear at a full court hearing of the apex court to explain why the government delayed publishing the disciplinary rules for the subordinate court judges since August 24.
The Chief Justice would hold a meeting with the senior judges and senior lawyers of the Supreme Court at his office at 8.30 AM today to discuss the situation that arose after rejection of disciplinary rules matter, said SC officials.
The Supreme Court has inherent powers to make rules as given by the Constitution, lawyers told New Age.
‘Subject to any law made by Parliament the Supreme Court may, with the approval of the President, make rules for regulating the practice and procedure of each division of the Supreme Court and of any court subordinate to it,’ says Article 107 of the Constitution.
Chief Justice SK Sinha repeated pointed out that the judiciary cannot function independently unless the disciplinary rules were in place.
He took pains to point out how dual control over the subordinate courts by law ministry and the Supreme Court was obstructing dispensation of justice.
The law secretary said that the Supreme Court had been informed about the President decision with regard to the disciplinary rules on Sunday afternoon.
He said that on September 7, the law ministry received the draft rules from the Supreme Court.
On Tuesday, the ministry sent the rules to the Prime Minister’s Office, he said.
He could not say when the PMO forwarded the rules to the President.
The law secretary said that he himself and legislative and Parliament affairs division secretary Mohammad Shahidul Haque will personally appear at today’s hearing of the apex court in the morning as summoned by it.
In 1999, the apex court had directed the government to separate lower judiciary from the executive branch and frame the disciplinary rules for the lower court judges.
Anxious to restore Supreme Court’s authority over the lower judiciary, the Chief Justice repeatedly reminded the government to put the disciplinary rules in place.
The government took several time extension to publish the disciplinary rules in the gazette without which the rules would remain useless.
The Chief Justice also called for amending the Constitution to end dual control of the law ministry and the SC over the lower judiciary.
He is the first Chief Justice to take up the issue in a statement posted on Supreme Court website on October 31, on the eve of the 9th anniversary of the separation of the lower judiciary.
The Chief Justice pointed out that Article 116 of the Constitution, unless amended, was the main impediment slowing down dispensation of justice.
The Supreme Court incorporated a new provision in the draft rules which stipulate departmental action against law ministry officials for their failure to carry out Supreme Court’s directives to draw disciplinary proceedings against errant lower court judges within the set time frame.
The Supreme Court widened the purview of misconduct for the subordinate judges by including charges like lodging false, trifling or irritating complaints to the authorities against any Supreme Court judge, court employees or fellow lower court judges.
Another provision added by the SC calls for treating violation of its lawful orders and directives by lower court judges and law ministry officials as disobedience and misconduct.
Another provision calls for empowering High Court Division judges to seek explanation from lower court judges if during court inspection they hear complaints against them to determine their veracity.