Why abolishing caretaker govt won’t be declared illegal: HC

The High Court today (19 August) asked the government to explain why the abolition of the non-partisan caretaker government system through the 15th Amendment to the Constitution should not be declared illegal.

The law secretary, legislative secretary, and the secretary of the National Parliament Secretariat, among others involved, have been directed to respond to the rule within four weeks, Attorney General Md Asaduzzaman told the media.

The High Court bench of Justice Naima Haider and Justice Shashanka Shekhar Roy issued the rule today after hearing a writ petition filed by Badiul Alam Majumdar, secretary of Shushashoner Jonno Nagorik (SHUJAN), and four others.

Lawyer Sharif Bhuiyan represented the petitioners, while Attorney General Md Asaduzzaman represented the state.

The provision for a caretaker government was abolished from the Constitution through the 15th Amendment.

It also required that national elections be conducted under the existing party government within the last 90 days of the parliamentary term.

This amendment also officially recognised Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as the Father of the Nation of Bangladesh and increased the reserved seats for women in the National Parliament from 45 to 50.

The 13th Amendment of the Constitution, in 1996, introduced the caretaker government system in Bangladesh, with a view to holding free and fair elections for the national Parliament. Three elections have been successfully carried out under the caretaker government system in 1996, 2001, and 2008.

The Supreme Court in its verdict on 10 May 2011 held the 13th amendment of 1996 introducing the caretaker government prospectively void and unconstitutional.

Later, the caretaker government system was abolished by the Parliament by the 15th amendment of constitution in 2011 on the basis of a decision of the Supreme Court.

Lawyer Sharif Bhuiyan told the court that following the abolition of the caretaker system the nation experienced three consecutive failed elections in 2014, 2018 and 2024. These failed elections ultimately led to the July 2024 student-led mass uprising which overthrew the government on 5 August 2024.

He said considering the consequences the nation has experienced since the abolition of the caretaker system and the need for a system to ensure free and fair elections, the court can determine the legality of the 15th Amendment.

The lawyer argued that in the summary judgement of the Appellate Division in the 13th Amendment case in 2011, the court ruled that the subsequent two parliamentary elections (the tenth and eleventh) should be held under a caretaker government. However, in defiance of this order, the 13th Amendment was repealed by the 15th Amendment.

The lawyer said this makes the 15th Amendment inconsistent with the Appellate Division's order and contrary to the basic structure of the Constitution.

Additionally, according to Article 142 of the Constitution, a referendum is required to change or amend multiple articles simultaneously. Many articles of the Constitution were altered through the 15th Amendment, but no referendum was held, the lawyer added