High Court suggests seven eligibility criteria for appointing top judges

The High Court has made seven observations for consideration in appointing top judges.

The court has recommended appointing people having sincere allegiance to the four fundamental principles of the State and the spirit of Liberation War.

The bench of Justice Obaidul Hassan and Justice Krishna Debnath made the observations in a verdict on a writ petition seeking guidelines on the appointment of Supreme Court judges.

The verdict on the writ petition filed by lawyer Raghib Rauf Chowdhury was issued on Apr 13 and its full version was published on Monday.

The existing process to select judges "could be made more effective, improved, transparent and realistic by taking the following matters into account as ‘eligibility criteria’", the verdict says.

In the first observation, the judges said a citizen of Bangladesh must have sincere allegiance to the fundamental principles of the State policy, which are nationalism, socialism, democracy and secularism as mentioned in Article 8 of the Constitution and also the spirit of the war of independence.

A person should not be recommended for appointment if his antecedent does not appear balanced with the above principles and the spirit," it observed.

The second observation said the people recommended for appointment must have brilliant academic profile, high degree of professional skill, and legal acumen and integrity.

The court's third observation is that a mechanism for online submission of curriculum vitae of intending people on the website of the Supreme Court may be installed so that the chief justice can ask them to appear before him for an interview.

According to the fourth observation, a person intending to apply for the job of a Supreme Court judge should be at least 45 years old.

The advocates enrolled in the Appellate Division should be prioritised for recommendation by the chief justice to ensure a high level of quality selection, the High Court said in the fifth observation.

The advocates enrolled in the High Court Division having a wide range of practicing experience with honesty and sincerity may be considered in recommending their names for appointment as judges, it said.

District and sessions judges with less than three years in this capacity should not be considered for recommendation as per the sixth observation.

"Also the merit and integrity must be the prime criteria while recommending the persons working in the subordinate judiciary," the High Court added in the seventh observation.

It also said the chief justice's recommendations must be prioritised in appointing judges. The chief justice may consult at least two senior most Appellate Division judges and two High Court judges before making any recommendation.

There should not be any room to disapprove or censure the chief justice's recommendation unless the recommended person is found by the executive to have an antecedent involving anti-state or antisocial subversive activities, the High Court said after making the observations.

It also said the remuneration of Supreme Court judges should be made "as smart as possible" to attract the brilliant lawyers to the job.

The High Court heard opinions of seven amici curiae during the hearing of the writ petition filed by Raghib in May, 2010.

The court issued a rule in June the same year and now the rule has been disposed of.

In line with the Constitution, the president appoints judges to the High Court Division and Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in consultation with the chief justice.

The criteria for the appointment, however, have not been defined by law 45 years into independence.