We
reject the provision for 45 nominated seats
Advocate Sultana Kamal,
Executive Director, Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK)
The provision of
mandatory displaying of the portrait according to us is quite unnecessary.
It definitely does not add any value in the Constitution. Under the
present circumstances, the change relating to the retirement age of
judges seems to be mere political. Any political manipulation is likely
to bring crisis to the system. The main motivation in introducing the
system was to ensure absolute neutrality. Whatever threatens the guarantee
to neutrality is undesirable.
As
women we reject the provision for 45 nominated seats. It is the provision
of nomination that we are against, not the provision of reserved seats.
One of the ways of ensuring women's proper participation would be through
direct election to the parliament.
Increasing
the retirement age of the Judges is done with an ulterior motive Justice
K.M.Subhan
The constitution
has been subjected to major surgery by the ruling clique. Increasing
the retirement age of the Judges of the Supreme Court is done with an
ulterior motive. The purpose is clearly to have a trusted Chief Adviser
of the caretaker Government of the ruling party's choice. This is apparent
from the timing of the amendment. This is bound to make the concerned
Chief Justice controversial which is most undesirable. This calculated
move is taken purely in self-interest of the party in power.
Increasing
the age of the Supreme Court Judges under the amendment is not a new
phenomenon. During President Zia's martial law, Chief Justice Sayem,
as the Chief Martial Law Administrator increased the retirement age
of the Judges of the Supreme Court from 60 years to 62 years by a martial
law order, to favour some Judges. If the age of the Supreme Court Judges
is considered necessary to be increased because of experience etc. it
should be adequately increased not only for the Judges of the supreme
Court but also for the same reason of the entire judiciary. In that
case it would be double standard to leave behind other government and
semi-government servants. What is sauce for gander is also sauce for
goose.
Why
women could not be elected in the parliament?
Shirin Akhter, President
Karmojibi Nari (KN)
I oppose the 14th
Amendment of Constitution, especially the 45 reserved seats for women
representation. Women Organisations are bargaining, lobbying and advocating
for direct election in the women seats in various ways for the last
20 years. So, Direct election is the main issue that has been denied
by the 14th Amendment of Constitution. Women are now more conscious
about their own rights, so they are fighting for their political empowerment.
The UP members are the best example for us. The Women Members are doing
their duty with their level best to serve the nation fighting the existing
external and internal constraints. So, why the women could not be elected
in the parliament? We absolutely oppose the Law Minister's note about
the selection process of women parliamentarians. It is important for
the government to rethink about the women seats and it would be the
best solution to take necessary action to arrange direct election in
the women seats.
We
know our politics and election is more or less dominated by the power,
black money and muscle man. So, the elected parliamentarians who come
from this process, would never select such women who is honest, sincere
to women cause. So, through the selection process- the honest, committed,
sincere women activist who has been fighting for the women empowerment
for a long time, could not be the part of the policy making process
of the nations as well as of the women folk. That's why, it is impossible
for the selected women policy makers to serve and fights for the women
interest.
The
amendment will manipulate the caretaker government system
Mushfiqur Rahman
Advocate, Dhaka Judges Court
The change brought
into the retirement age of Supreme Court judges is without any doubt
prompted by the desire to manipulate the caretaker government system.
This event reminds us of the inevitable truth that law can't make one
behave democratically but can only provide the mere basis of democracy.
It is always susceptible to political motive and irresistible temptation
to hold the crown for an indefinite period of time. Only when the practice
of democratic values is established within and outside the political
parties, one can think of real democracy. Otherwise whatever good or
bad is written down in the law books, it is no more than rhetoric.
