Published : 30 Jun 2026, 04:25 PM
Updated : 08 Sep 2026, 09:20 AM
Despite winning the vote for the Chattogram-4 parliamentary seat, BNP candidate Aslam Chowdhury has been barred from taking office due to defaulting on a loan.
It was not clear from the decision whether the Jamaat-e-Islami candidate, who received the second-most votes, would be declared the winner automatically, or a fresh election would be held.
The four-member bench of the Supreme Court’s Appellate Division led by Chief Justice Zubayer Rahman Chowdhury scrapped Aslam’s candidacy in a decision on Tuesday, suspending the results of the election.
Lawyers say that the Election Commission (EC) will decide its course of action once the full verdict is published.
Lawyers Miftah Uddin Chowdhury and AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon represented Aslam at the court hearing.
Lawyer Mohammad Shishir Manir and Barrister ASM Shahriar Kabir represented the Jamaat-e-Islami candidate for the seat, Anwar Siddique. They were accompanied by Md Azim Uddin Patwary.
Bank Asia was represented by lawyer Kamal Ul Alam and Jamuna Bank by lawyer ASM Shariar Kabir at the hearing.
Attorney General Ruhul Quddus Kazal appeared for the state. Speaking to the media after the verdict, he said it would “inappropriate” to comment on the decision without seeing it in its full form.
"From my long experience in the legal profession, I can say that the people have elected their representatives through their opinions and votes. The representative who was elected, due to a legal matter, did not fully reflect the opinions of the people. I hope that the people will get the opportunity to deliver their verdict again," he said.
Asked if a by-election could be held for the seat, the attorney general said: “Perhaps.”
Questioned whether Aslam would be able to contest such a poll, Kazal said:
“If he overcomes the disqualification, there is no obstacle barring him from taking part in the election. A person's disqualification for a certain period of time does not remain for the rest of his life. The main issue was what his status was (as a loan defaulter) on the day of submitting his nomination papers for the election. This is the main issue.”
"If he overcomes that disqualification and becomes eligible in the next election, then there should be no legal obstacle for him to stand as a candidate in the poll."
Before the 13th national parliamentary elections, the returning officer had declared Aslam's nomination papers valid after screening them on Jan 3 of this year.
However, Jamaat candidate Anwar and Jamuna Bank appealed to the Election Commission (EC) alleging that he had defaulted on a loan.
After a hearing on Jan 18, the EC dismissed the appeal, and Aslam's candidacy remained intact.
The two complainants filed separate writ petitions in the High Court challenging the Election Commission's decision. On Jan 27, the High Court dismissed both the writ petitions after a hearing, maintaining the validity of Aslam’s candidacy.
Jamaat candidate Anwar filed a leave to appeal in the Supreme Court's Appellate Division against the High Court's order. On Feb 3, a five-member appeal bench headed by the Chief Justice granted his appeal.
The order said that even if the appeal was accepted for a hearing, Aslam would be able to contest the Feb 12 poll. However, the results of the constituency would not be published until the appeal is finally disposed of.
Despite the uncertainty, Aslam beat Anwar by 53,000 votes in the election. But, as per the Supreme Court's instructions, the Election Commission postponed the publication of the official gazette with the results. As a result, Aslam's oath-taking was also delayed.
Aslam then appealed to the Appellate Division, asking for the declaration of the results and permission to take the oath. Anwar filed his own appeal on Mar 31.
Following this, the Appellate Division heard the matter. At the hearing, the Supreme Court took into consideration the opinions of lawyers M Kamrul Haque Siddique and Prabir Niyogi as amicus curiae, or friends of the court.
The verdict given by the Appellate Division on Tuesday after the final hearing blocked Aslam’s path to parliament.
After the verdict, Anwar's lawyer Shishir said: "The granting of the appeal means that Aslam Chowdhury has become ineligible and his candidacy is null and void. His nomination has been scrapped as a defaulter, meaning he was not an eligible candidate in this election.”
"The Election Commission forgot that a guarantor of a loan also has the same liability as the borrower, regarding which the Appellate Division has given its decision."
Explaining why Aslam's candidacy was cancelled, Shishir said that Dec 29, 2025, was the last day for filing nomination papers.
"Aslam Chowdhury was a defaulter on that day. He was ineligible from the beginning."
The lawyer for the Jamaat candidate described the verdict as a “milestone” and a “blazing example.”
He said, “This is a groundbreaking step in enforcing the law on defaulters. No matter which party the defaulter belongs to, according to Article 66 of the Constitution and the RPO, he is ineligible to vote or be an elected member. This will serve as a warning to follow the law in the future.”
Asked what will happen in the Chattogram-4 constituency now, the lawyer said: “According to the prevailing rules, if the person who received the highest number of votes is ineligible, the next closest candidate is declared the winner. However, specific guidelines will be available once the full verdict of the Appellate Division is published and the Election Commission will settle it.”
He said that the election tribunal usually makes a decision within 45 days of the gazette publication, but in this case, the gazette publication was suspended due to the decision of the Appellate Division. As a result, waiting until the full verdict is a “good solution”.
Regarding the suspension of the results, Shishir said: “The publication of the results was suspended until now because the results will be published in light of the full verdict. For now, we do not know how the Election Commission will gazette it until the full verdict comes.”
In response to a journalist's question about the lack of an MP depriving the people of the area of development, he said: "The Supreme Court will decide whether the candidate is qualified or not, not look the people's benefits or disadvantages. Whether someone is actually a defaulter or not, that is the Supreme Court's purview and the consequences will fall accordingly. Later, action will be taken according to the law.
"Local development will be determined through the government or administration, but a defaulter cannot be declared eligible."
