__MAIN_TEXT__

Page 1

Research Monograph On Vacation of Seats in the Parliament: A Study with the Decided Cases by the Higher Court of the Bangladesh.

Contents Introduction Objective of the research Nature and Scope of the research Research Methodology Limitation of the research Chapter One Concept and Background of vacation of seat in the election 1.1 Definition 1.2 Background of vacation of seat in the election (A) England (B) U.S.A (C) India 1.3 Background of vacation of seat in the election in Banglad

Chapter Two Vacation of seat on the ground of illegality 2.1 2.2

Constitutional illegality Rules of Procedure of parliament

Chapter Three Vacation of seat due to disqualification 3.1 3.2 3.3

Ground of disqualification Leading cases Effect.

Chapter Four Vacation of seat under Article 70 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

Meaning Application of Article 70 Leading cases Comments


Chapter Five Vacation for absence from Parliament 5.1 General 5.2 Reason for this provision in the constitution 5.3 Practice Chapter Six 6.1 Finding 6.2 Recommendation Conclusion Introduction: Though our orientation with parliament is much longer than many other developing countries, the first two decades (1971-90) of Bangladeshi Polities are marked by a plethora of successful and abortive military cups, intermittent movements for the restoration of a democratic system, rigged elections, in effective parliament and the omnipotence of chief Executives1. Most of the times instead of becoming a sovereign parliament, it remained a ‘lame and tame parliament’. Today even after nineteen years of the revival of parliamentary democracy, parliament faces a huge credibility crisis. Confrontational polities and a winner takes all attitude have led to situation that 'boycott' of successive sessions and absenteeism have put a big question mark over its capability to remain the supreme watchdog of public interest. Consequently there is a hue and cry to recharge parliamentary vigor to bolster democratization2. A bitter experience in the Pakistan period that a member change one party to another, frequent resignation threatened the democracy and for this Marshall Law captured most of time of our country. On a cursory look the constitution seems to provide adequately for the maintenance of responsible. Governance of the state. Parliament can cause the fall of government as the prime minister and his cabinet is collectively liable to the parliament. So in order to ensure a good government parliament required strong and qualified cabinet and members. That is why constitution and other law determine the responsibility of the members. If it is not complied with the seat of that particular representative will be vacated. Objective of the research: 1 2

2


The Topic of research in vacation of seat in the parliament. There are following objective behind my research which I tried to represent in my research. Such as:

(a)

To define the term vacation of seat in the parliament.

(b)

Background of vacation of seat in the parliament in some strong democrat countries and the history of our country so that difference can easily be identified.

(c)

Vacation of seat under the supreme law of the land and its application in other relevant law of the land.

(d)

Discussion of the ground of disqualification under the leading cases of Bangladesh.

(e)

Find out the relation of vacation with Article 70; make a discussion on the amendment of article 70 and authentic suggestion regarding this matter.

(f)

Absence from parliament by the members and find out it drawback in our democracy and rule of law.

(g)

Find out the problem of whole research and give solution to solve those problems. Nature and Scope of the research: Vacation of seat is a much said but little understood concept. It is system that attempts to protect the right of citizens from arbitrary and abusive use of representative of a parliament power. But the seat will not be vacated as to create conditions in which the dignity of man as an individual is upheld. This dignity requires not only the recognition of certain civil or political rights but also creation of certain political, social, economical, educational and cultural conditions which are essential to the full development of his personality. Vacation of seat of the member of the parliament does not include expulsion of Member of Parliament. Prima facie there is no


provision in the constitution for the expulsion of a member of parliament. Article 66 (2) relates to the disqualification and vacation of seat of a MP. Apart from declaring the vacation of a seat, the speaker in empowered to order withdrawal or suspension of a member of parliament. Under order immediate withdrawal of a member from the house for grossly disorderly misconduct. Research Methodology: The Topic of the research says that it is an analytical research. So I try my best to analyze my research through a clear interpretation. I have given great emphasized on case study and try to clarify every chapter through case analysis. To this end 1 have tried to accommodate almost all the leading cases of Bangladesh regarding this matter with short facts, conflicting arguments and response of the Supreme Court to the arguments put forward. Limitation of the study: Every research study has some limitations. So this research monograph is not the exception of this limitation and reduced the scope of the study. This research is the most important topic “Nevertheless, I shall try my level best to collect the information on the topic refer to the research paper but to prepare the research I faced various barrier concerning information. The main limitation to prepare this thesis is time limitation. To make a fulfill thesis the time period is not sufficient. Another problem is that it is not available in journal, magazines, and books. Therefore, it is difficult to collect materials in Bangladesh perspective. Beside these, then are also some negligible problems to make this thesis fruitfully.

Chapter one Concept and background of vacation of seat in the election. 1.1 Definition: In parliament democracy, the executive and legislature become merged with one another. While people are voting for electing the legislature they actually vote for electing the executive. People elect their representative who is the part of the legislature as wellas the executive. In a sense they represent whole Bangladesh. So the representative of the people must be a qualified one. 4


Bearing this the constitution as well as other laws provides a requisite to be a member of parliament. If any disqualification is found, his membership will be vacated. Article 66, 67, 70 of the constitution provides those disqualifications. 1.2 Background of Vacation of Seat in the Election (A)England: Vacation of certain office-holders from membership of the House of Commons has existed since the early seventeenth century. These were previously scattered through publican private Acts and the Journals of the House. By the 1940s, confusion about the actual and intended scope and effect of existing disqualifying provisions, together with fears about the effects on parliamentary democracy of special wartime appointments of Members, led to the appointment of a Select Committee (the Herbert Committee). The Herbert Committee looked particularly at the law and practice governing the disqualification of those holding "offices or places of profit under the Crown" and the report7contained recommendations for legislation to replace earlier statutes. After the war and there construction period, work began in 1949 on drafting a bill to put the Herbert Committee recommendations into effect. However, there were serious difficulties in arriving at a satisfactory legal expression of some of the concepts recommended by the Herbert Committee and it was not until 1955 that a bill finally went to the House. 3 Progress was difficult and a further Select Committee, the Spans Committee8, was set up in1956 to reconsider the Bill. The Committee stated ‘ certain offices are incompatible with membership of the House of Commons, some as involving physical impossibilities of simultaneous attendance in two places, some because of possible patronage, and others Because of a conflict of duties’ (Para 2). The Spans Committee examined the Bill after second reading and made several recommendations but the revised bill was not finally enacted until the 1956-7 session. Legislation was finally enacted as the House of Commons Disqualification Act 1957. This was re-enacted, unchanged in substance and as a consolidating measure, in 1975 when offices disqualifying from the Northern Ireland Assembly were separated out and covered by the Northern Ireland Assembly Disqualification Act 1975.4

(B) U.S.A. The framers of the Constitution created a bicameral Congress primarily as a compromise between those who felt that each state, since it was sovereign, should be equally represented, and those who felt the Legislature must directly represent the People, as did the House of Commons in Britain. There was also a desire to have two Houses that could act as an internal check on each other. One was intended to be a "People's House" directly elected by the People, and with short terms obliging the representatives to remain close to their constituents. The other was intended to represent the states to such extent as they retained their sovereignties not expressly delegated to the national government. The Senate 3 R.A Butler,Birth Reprensetive And Responsible Government,P.162. 4 Ibid, p.164.


is thus not intended to represent the people of the United States equally. The Constitution provides that the approval of both chambers is necessary for the passage of legislation. The Senate of the United States was formed on the example of the ancient Roman Senate. The name is derived from the senate’s, Latin for council of elders (from senex meaning old man in Latin).[11]The Constitution stipulates that no constitutional amendment may be created to deprive a state of its equal suffrage in the Senate without that state's consent. The District of Columbia and all other territories (including territories, protectorates, etc.) are not entitled to representation in either House of the Congress.[12] The United States has had 50 states since 1959, thus the Senate has had 100 senators since 1959.The disparity between the most and least populous states has grown since the Great Compromise, which granted each state equal representation in the Senate and a minimum of three presidential Electors, regardless of population. In 1787, Virginia had roughly 10 times the population of Rhode Island, whereas today California has roughly 70 times the population of Wyoming, based on the 1790 and 2000 censuses. This means some citizens are effectively an order of magnitude better represented in the senate than those in other states. Seats in the House of Representatives are approximately proportionate to the population of each state, reducing the disparity of representation. Before the passage of the Seventeenth Amendment, senators were elected by the individual state legislatures.[13] However, problems with repeated vacant seats due to the inability of a legislature to elect senators, intrastate political struggles, and even bribery and intimidation gradually led to a growing movement to amend the Constitution to allow for the direct election of senators 5 Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for senators: 1) each senator must be at least 30 years old, 2) must have been a citizen of the United States for at least the past nine years, and 3) must be (at the time of the election) an inhabitant of the state he or she seeks to represent. Neale, Thomas H. (March 10, 2009). The age and citizenship qualifications for senators are more stringent than those for representatives. In Federalist No. 62, James Madison justified this arrangement by arguing that the "senatorial trust" called for a "greater extent of information and stability of character."The Senate (not the judiciary) is the sole judge of a senator's qualifications. During its early years, however, the Senate did not closely scrutinize the qualifications of members. As a result, three senators who failed to meet the age qualification were nevertheless admitted to the Senate: Henry Clay (aged 29 in 1806), and Armistead Thomson Mason (aged 28 in 1816) and John Eaton (aged 28 in 1818). Such an occurrence, however, has not been repeated since.[15] In 1934, Rush D. Holt, Sr. was elected to the Senate at the age of 29; he waited until he turned 30 to take the oath of office. Likewise, Joe Biden was elected to the Senate shortly before his 30th birthday in 1972; he had passed his 30th birthday by the time the Senate conducted its swearing-in ceremony for that year's incoming senators in January 1973.The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution disqualifies from the Senate any federal or state officers who had taken the requisite oath to support the Constitution, but later engaged in rebellion or aided the enemies of the United States.. That Amendment, however, also provides a method to remove that disqualification: a two-thirds vote of both chambers of Congress. 6 (C) India: 5 Harvard William C.,The Government and Politics of the U.S.A. PP 96-97 6 Ibid pp 100-101.

6


The concept of vacation of seat was also adopted with some modification in India. A clear and precise statement in this regard was made in Section 26(1) (a) if the Government of India Act, 1935 which provided that a person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a Member of either Chamber if be held any office of profit under the Crown of India, other than an office declared by Act of the Federal Legislature not to force on 26 th January 1950, the provision in Article 102 relating to the disqualification of Members of legislature read: A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament-(a) if he holds any office of profit under the government of India or the government of any state, other than an office declared by law not to disqualify its holder.7 Explanation to Article 102 explicitly excluded union/state ministers from the definition of holders of offices of profit. Later on, the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1950 was enacted. Section 2 of the Act included a Deputy Minister, or a Parliamentary Secretary or a Parliamentary Undersecretary within the list of exemption. This was followed by the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1951 which further extended the list of exemption, in 1959 the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959 was passed. This Act widened the exemption list once again, further, in light of the recent case of Ms. Jaya Bachan Vs Union of India,8 a Bill titled the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Amendment Bill, and 2006 with retrospective effect was introduced and passed in the Lok Sabha. Even the President APJ Abdul Kalam himself sending the Bill back, a hue and cry arose all over India claiming the law to be destructive of the spirit of democratic constitutionalism,9 Section 3 of the Amendment Act, however, inserted a Table in the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959 listing 55 statutory and non-statutory bodies offices in which were declared not to be ‘offices of profit.’

1.3 Background of vacation of seat in Bangladesh: In the Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972 the prohibition against any Member of Parliament taking any disqualification was in Article 66(2)(f). Article 66(3) contained an explanation excluding certain offices from the operation of Article 66(f). However, Article 66(2)(f) and 66(3) were omitted by Section 5 of the Constitution Act of 1975. Then the contents of erstwhile Article 66(2)(f) and 66(3) were again inserted in the Constitution by the Second Proclamation Order, 1978 (The Second Proclamation Order IV of 1978) as Article 66 (2) (dd) and 66(2A)respectively. If provides: A person shall be disqualified for election as, or for being, a Member of Parliament who-

7 the Constitution of India, 1950, Article 102 (1) (a) 8 (2006) 5 SCC 266; 9 Sridhar, Dr. Madabhushi.


(dd) holds any Office of Profit in the service of the Republic other than an office which is declared by law not to disqualify its holder. Undergoing various amendments time to time to suit the necessary of different rulers the explanation stands today as follows: (2A) For the purposes of this article a person shall not be deemed to hold an office of profit on the service of the Republic by person only that he is a President, Prime Minister, Minister, Minister of State or Deputy Minister

Chapter Two Vacation of seat on the ground of illegality 2.1 Constitutional Illegality: The main provision regarding the vacation of seat in the election is Article 67 of the constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. The constitution states that1. A Member of Parliament shall vacate his seat if he has incurred a disqualification under clause (2) of article 66. Article 66(2) states that A person shall be disqualified for election as, or for being, a Member of Parliament who(a) Is declared by a competent court to be of unsound mind. (b) Is an undercharged insolvent. (c) Acquires the citizenship of, or affirms of acknowledges allegiance to, a foreign state. (d) Has been, on conviction for a criminal offence involving moral turpitude, sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years unless a period of five years has elapsed since his release. (dd) holds any office of profit in this service of the Republic other than an office which is declared by law not to disqualify its holders. (g) Is disqualified for such election by or under any law. 8


2. If he is absent from parliament for 90 consecutive days. 3. In the circumstances of article 70.10 Besides this a seat in the election may be vacated on the ground of Article 71. Article 7111 states that (1) No person shall at the same time be a Member of Parliament in respect of two or more constituencies. (2)Nothing in clause (1) shall prevent a person from being at the same time a candidate for two or more constituencies, but in the event of his being elected for more than one(a) Within thirty days after his last election the person elected shall deliver to the Chief Election Commissioner a signed declaration specifying the constituency which he wishes to represent, and the seats of the other constituencies for which he was elected shall thereupon fall vacant. (b) If the person elected fails to comply with sub-clause (a) all the seats for which he was elected shall fall vacant. . 2.2 Rules of procedure of Parliament Rules of Procedure of parliament provide the ground of vacation along with the procedure of vacation. Under Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure the Speaker may order immediate 'withdrawal' of a Member from the House for grossly disorderly conduct. Under Rule 16 of the Rules of Procedure the Speaker may name a member who disregards the authority of the Chair or abuses the rules of the House by persistently and willfully obstructing the business thereof. If a member is so named and a motion is made in the floor, the Speaker shall forthwith put the question that the member be 'suspended' from the service of the House for a period not exceeding the remainder of the session. So clearly there is no provision for 'expulsion' either in the constitution or in the Rules of Procedure. If the Court declares someone undercharged insolvent or of unsound mind or convicts him for offence involving moral turpitude etc the Court shall inform the Speaker about the decision (Rule 172, 173 of the Rules of Procedure). The Speaker in his turn shall inform the House of it (Rule 176). If any dispute is raised in the floor, the matter goes to the Election Commission whose decision is final (Article 66(4)). If no dispute is raised in the floor the Speaker declares his seat vacated as per Article 67(1)(d). The Speaker cannot proceed to declare his seat vacated on the basis of newspaper report unless and until the order of the Court is communicated to him through official channel (Hussein Mohd Ershad v. Abdul Muktadir Chowdhury 53 DLR 569, at p. 574). 10 The Constitution of Bangladesh: Article 67. 11 Ibid :Article 66


Rule 178 says about Reference to Election Commission and vacation of seats (1) If any dispute arises as to whether a member has after his election, become subject to any of the disqualifications mentioned in clause (2) of Article 66 or as to whether a member should vacate his seat pursuant to Article 70 of the Constitution, the dispute shall be referred by the Speaker to the Election Commission. (2)If the decision of the Election Commission is that the member has become disqualified or should vacate his seat, as the case may be, the member shall cease to be a member. (3) If a member resigns his seat, or is absent, without leave of the House, for ninety consecutive sitting days of the Parliament, or fails to make and subscribe his oath of office within the time mentioned in clause (1)(a) of Article 67 of the Constitution, or otherwise ceases to be a member, the Speaker shall bring the fact to the notice of the House, if it is in session; Provided that when the Parliament is not in session, the Speaker shall inform the House immediately after the House reassembles that a member has resigned or ceased to be a member, as the case may be, during the inter-session period. (4) If the seat of a member becomes vacant, the Secretary shall cause a notification to that effect to be published in the Gazette and forward a copy of the notification to the member concerned and also to the Election Commission for taking steps to fill the vacancy thus caused Others ground of disqualification: Article 12(1) of the Representation of the People’s Order, 1972 states that a person shall be disqualified from being elected as, and from being, a member, if he(a) Is a person holding any office of profit in the service of the Republic or of a statutory public authority? (ai) is a person who is convicted of an offence punishable under Articles 73, 74, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84 and 86 and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years, unless a period of five years has elapsed since the date of his release; (aii) is a person whose election to a seat is declared void on any of the grounds mentioned in sub-clauses (c), (d) and (e) of clause (1) of Article 63, unless a period of five years has elapsed since the date of such declaration; (aiii) has been dismissed or removed or compulsorily retired from the service of the Republic or of any statutory public authority on the ground of corruption, unless a period of five years has elapsed since his dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement; 10


(b) whether by himself or by any person or body of persons in trust for him or for his benefit or on his account or as a member of a Hindu undivided family, has any share or interest in a contract, not been a contract between a co operative society and Government for the supply of goods to, or for the execution of any contract or the performance of any services undertaken by Government Provided further that a person shall be disqualified from being elected as, and from being, a member, if he(a) being a loanee, other than a loanee who has taken the loan from any bank for construction of a house for residential purposes, has defaulted in repaying on the day of submission of nomination paper any loan or instalment thereof taken by him from a bank. (b) Is a director of a company or a partner of a firm which has defaulted in repaying on the day of submission of nomination paper any loan or any installment thereof taken by it from a bank? (c) Being a director of a financial institution. 12

Chapter Three Vacation due to Disqualification 3.1 Ground of disqualification A person shall be disqualified for election as, or for being, a Member of Parliament who(a) Is declared by a competent court to be of unsound mind. (b) Is an undercharged insolvent. (c) Acquires the citizenship of, or affirms of acknowledges allegiance to, a foreign state. (d) Has been, on conviction for a criminal offence involving moral turpitude, sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years unless a period of five years has elapsed since his release. (dd) holds any office of profit in this service of the Republic other than an office which is declared by law not to disqualify its holders. (g) Is disqualified for such election by or under any law. 13 3.2 Leading Cases Acquisition of Citizenship of another State Originally a citizen of Bangladesh could not acquire citizenship of another state without losing Bangladeshi citizenship. After the 1978 amendment of citizenship law it is now possible. But a person who is to discharge the duty of Parliament must declare allegiance to 12 Representation of the People’s Order,1972: 13 The constitution of the people’s Republic of Bangladesh, Article 66(2).


Bangladesh only and not to any other state. Accordingly, as per Article 66(2) of the Constitution, a person shall be disqualified for election as, or for being Member of Parliament, if he acquires the citizenship of, or affirms or acknowledges allegiance to, a foreignstate. Therefore, any person who acquires the citizenship of a foreign country cannot seek election and he would loss his membership if he is already elected. M. Abdul Halim v. Abul Hasan Chowdhury14 Here the election and continuance of Mr Abul Hasan Chowdhun a5 a Member of the 7th Parliament was contested under the provisions of Article 66(2)(c) of the Constitution. Mr Abul Hasan Chowdhun acquired British citizenship in 1995 and he was elected to the Parliament in 1996 and continued as Member of Parliament. It was held that a citizen of Bangladesh is allowed to acquire the citizenship of a foreign country under Article 2B of the Citizenship (Temporary Provisions) Order, 1972. However, if he is found to be a citizen of Bangladesh as well as of a foreign country at the date of submission of his nomination paper or afterwards, he shall be disqualified to be, or to continue as, a Member of Parliament.29 The Court found that Mr Abul Hasan Chowdhury was disqualified not only as a Member of Parliament but also was disqualified to contest in the 7th parliamentary election. However, in the meantime the 7th Parliament being dissolved, the writ became anfractuous and the Court discharged the Rule. Conviction Involving Moral Turpitude Article 66(2)(d) of the Constitution provides that a person shall not continue as a Member or not be able to contest in the parliamentary election, if he has been, on conviction for a criminal offence involving moral turpitude, sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years unless a period of five years has elapsed since his release. However, in Monoranjan Mukherjee v. Election Commission (41 DLR 484) an additional qualification added by the Court is that the conviction must be by a regular criminal court as distinguished by a Martial Law Court. The test of determining moral turpitude will be: i) Whether the act leading to a conviction was such as could shock the moral conscience of the society in general; ii) Whether the motive which led to the act was a base one, and iii) Whether on account of the act having been committed the perpetrator could be considered to be a man of depraved character or a person who was to be looked down upon by the society.30 If the answer to any of the above questions is in the affirmative, the Act involves moral turpitude. Md Zahedul Isalm Khan v.HM Ershad15

14 21 BLD 391. 15 21 BLD 376.

12


The short fact of this writ petition is that in 1996, HM Ershad was elected to the 7th Parliament from Rangpur-3 constituency. After he vacated the office of President in 1991, several corruption cases were filed against him. In 1993 in one of them, widely known as Janata Tower case, he was convicted with 7 seven years' imprisonment. He appealed to the High Court Division which reduced his imprisonment to five years with additional two years for default in paying the fine imposed. On August 24, 2000, the Appellate Division rejected the appeal against the High Court Division order. But the Appellate Division further reduced the sentence maintaining the order of fine in default of which he had to undergo six months' imprisonment. After that Md. Zahedul Islam Khan, an elector from Rangpur-3 constituency, brought a writ of quo warranto asking in what capacity HM Ershad was holding the office of MP from Rangpur-3 constituency. Barrister Rokon Uddin Mahmud, appearing on behalf of the petitioner argued that after the AD decision HM Ershad became disqualified as per Article 66(2)(d). Barrister Rafiq-ul-Hoq appearing on behalf of HM Ershad argued that the conviction of Ershad did not involve any moral turpitude. And so Article 66(2)(d) was not attracted.32 The Division Bench comprising Syed J R Mudassir Hossain J and Md. Arayesh Uddin JJ held that the provision of Article 66(2) (d) was attracted and HM Ershad's membership was lost.. HM Ershad v. Zahedul Islam Khan16 HM Ershad brought this leave to appeal petition against the decision of the High Division. Advocate Abdul Malek appearing on behalf of HM Ershad argued that though his client was convicted of a criminal offence, there was nothing to show that that it involved moral turpitude.34 Barrister Rokan Uddin Mahmud appearing on behalf of Md Zahedul Islam Khan cited the following paragraph from Mahmudul Islam's book on Constitutional Law of Bangladesh to explain the proper connotation of moral turpitude: It is well settled that all criminal convictions do not attract the disqualification (Article 66(2) (d) - Author). It must be a conviction for offence involving moral turpitude. But the expression moral turpitude has been used in the Constitution in narrow sense, otherwise the use of this expression would be meaningless. It is well settled that there must be an element of depravity in the act leading to the conviction. That act must be vile and harmful to the society in general or contrary to the accepted rules of morality. Test of determining moral turpitude will be whether the act leading to a conviction was such as could shock the moral conscience of the society in general and whether the motive which led to the act was a base one and whether on account of the act having been committed the perpetrator could be considered to be a man of depraved character or a person who has to be look down upon by the society. If the answer is in the affirmative the act involves moral turpitude. Accepting the submission of Barrister Rokon Uddin Mahmud, the Court held: Embezzlement of State money by a person who was the President of the country and using the same for his personal benefit or living or having properties disproportionate to his known source of income will definitely come within the ambit of moral turpitude. Holding Office of Profit

16 54 DLR (AD) 1


Separation of power requires that the Members of Parliament must not be obliged to the Government nor be amenable to its influence. Accordingly all the persons holding any office of profit in the Service of the Republic shall be barred from seeking election to the Parliament.Article 66(2) (dd) of the Constitution provides that one shall not be qualified to be or to continue as a member of parliament if he holds any office of profit in this service of the Republic other than an office which is declared by law not to disqualify its holders. Article 66(2A) specifically provides that a person shall not be deemed to hold an office of profit in the service of the Republic by reason only that he is a President, Prime Minister, Minister, Minister of State or Deputy Minister. Article 12 of the Representation of People's Order 1972 has extended the disqualification to the holder of office of profit in the service of statutory public authorities except Union Parishad, Zilla Parishad, Paurashava and Municipal Corporations. H M Ershad v. Abdul Muktadir Chowdhury

17

Ultimately the High Court Division confirmed the lower court conviction of HM Ershad on 24/08/2000. Ershad filed an appeal before the Appellate Division. There also his conviction was upheld. In the meantime, before disposal of the appeal, the Parliament Secretariat issued a notification declaring the seat of Ershad vacant on the ground of Article 66(2)(d) (conviction involving moral turpitude). Ershad challenged that notification in this Writ Petition. His main contention was that only a final conviction confirmed in appeal may attract the disqualification. Since a leave petition against the conviction was pending before the Appellate Division, Barrister KS Nabi appearing on behalf of the petitioner argued, the notification of the parliament secretariat was pre-matured. Unless and until his constitutional right of appeal and review before the Appellate Division were exhausted, he could not be considered convicted.38 Barrister Tania Amir appearing on behalf of the respondent claimed that no where in the Constitution, it is said that the conviction to be effective must be confirmed in appeal. It is disqualification on conviction not final conviction. If his appeal is accepted he shall be entitled to get back his seat as a Member of Parliament. Moreover interest of individual must give way to a public interest so if a MP is convicted on ground of offence involving moral turpitude he must at once vacate his seat.39 Though the High Court Division declared the notification of the parliament secretariat void on other grounds, on the question when does the disqualification arise, the two judges ABM Khairul Haque J. and Md Joynal Abedin J were divided. Holding that the disqualification arises only after the conviction is confirmed by the highest appellate court, Md Joynal Abedin J. raised a question as to how to settle to the anomaly if one Member is disqualified and a by-election is held and then he is acquitted by the last of appeal. Then there will be two claimants of the seat. Referring to the case ofMahbub Uddin Ahmed v. EC 50 DLR 417, Br. Tania Amir argued that the candidate contesting the by -election shall do so knowing that there may be a reversal of the conviction that is the appeal.40 Joynal Abedin J. however disagreed with the Mahbub Uddin Ahmed v. EC itself. To him, there cannot be any by election subjection to condition under article 123(4).41 Rather relaying on Serajul Hug Chowdhury v. Nur Ahmed Company 19 DLR 766 he held that 17 53 DLR 569

14


the disqualification will operate from the final disposal of appeal.42 'Sentence' mentioned in Article 66(2) is a 'final sentence'43 and hence the notification is a pre mature notification. ABM Khairul Haque J., on the other hand, agreeing to the submission of Tania Amir decided that a court of law has got no power to add anything to or omit anything from what is provided in the law itself. So the court cannot read 'conviction' to be 'final conviction'.44 He disagreed with Serajul Huq Chowdhury v. Nur Ahmed Company. The purpose of law will be frustrated if one can delay the disposal of his appeal in this or that plea and in the meantime he conveniently continue as the member of the Parliament. And the purpose of law is that the representative of People must not be of questionable reputation, Justice ABM Khairul Haque opined. 3.3 Effect: The main effect of disqualification is to ensure that Members are fit and proper to sit in the House, and are able to carry out their duties and responsibilities free from undue pressures from other sources. A Member should be free from possible conflicts of interest which might distort his behavior as an independent member of the legislature and his freedom to represent the best interests of his constituents. These include financial or other dependence on Ministerial, Prime Ministerial or Crown Patronage; and also membership of a foreign (though not Commonwealth) legislature. Historically, this has been the basis of the great majority of disqualifications.

Chapter Four Vacation of seat for article 70 4.1 Meaning: Article 70 in the constitution shortly known as floor-crossing bears a wide meaning. Crossing the floor" means to leave one's political party and join another, or in a more general sense, to vote against one's own party. The government and opposition face each other and a member must cross the floor to join the other party. In politics, crossing the floor has two meaning referring to a change of allegiance in a Westminster system parliament. The term originates from the British House of Commons, which is configured with the Government and Opposition facing each other on rows of benches. Votes, or divisions, are taken by entering lobbies to the left and right of the chamber to have one's vote tallied; the "Aye Lobby" is on the Government side and the "No Lobby" on the Opposition side. If one wish to vote against one's party, one must quite literally cross thigh an MP were to switch parties, they would also need to cross the floor18. 4.2 Application under article seventy:

18Crossing the floor in UK. Page.145


As per requirement of the article sixty six sub article four of the constitution of Bangladesh. Article 70(1) of the constitution of Bangladesh says: "A person elected as a member of parliament at an election at which he was nominated as a candidate by a political party shall vacate his seat if he resigns from that party or votes in parliament against that party. Explanation.-- if a member of parliament -- (a) being present in parliament abstains from voting, or (b) absents himself from any sitting of parliament, ignoring the direction of the party which nominated him at the election as a candidate not to do so, he shall be deemed to have voted against that party."19

It may be mentioned that the constitution of Bangladesh, which was adopted on November 4, 1972 and came into force on December 16 of the same year, did not contain the explanatory part in Article 70. It was included in Article 70 by the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1975.Let us now see what the constitutions in our neighboring countries say on the vacation of seat by an MP on grounds of his defection. According to the constitution of India, a member of either House (Council of States or House of People) of Union Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly of a state belonging to any political party shall be disqualified from being a member of the House (a) if he has voluntarily given up his membership of such political party; or (b) if he votes or abstains from voting in such House contrary to any direction issued by the political party to which he belongs without obtaining the prior permission of such political party and such voting or abstention has not been condoned by such political party within fifteen days from the date of such voting or abstention. According to the constitution of Pakistan, a member of a House (the National Assembly or the Senate) or of the Provincial Assembly shall lose his seat if he defects from a political party which nominated him, or votes contrary to any direction issued by the parliamentary party to which he belongs, or abstains from voting in the House against party policy in relation to a Bill. He however gets an opportunity to appeal and the party chief's decision is final. The 1990 constitution of Nepal says that the seat of an MP becomes vacant if the party of which he was a member when elected provides notification in the manner set forth by law that he has abandoned the party. According to the constitution of Fiji, a member of the House of Representatives vacates his seat if he resigns from the political party for which he was a candidate at the time he was

19 The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. Article 70

16


last elected to the House of Representatives, or if he is expelled from the political party for which he was a candidate at the time he was last elected to the House of representatives. 20 4.3 Leading cases:Abdus Samad Azad V. Bangladesh21 Six MPs from AL in the 5th Parliament namely, Abdus Samad Azad, Suranjit Sen Gupta, Tofael Ahmed, Matia Chowdhury, Rahmat Ali, Md Nasim and Prof Abdul Hafiz challenged the President’s Election 1991, on the ground of being inconsistent with the Constitution. The Act introduced Open Ballot voting in the Presidential Election, while the original constitution specifically provided that the election should be in Secret Ballot. Moudud Ahmed, then a Member of Parliament from Jatya Party also brought a writ petition challenging the Act, as the three writ petitions involved similar questions of laws, they were considered together by the Bench of F.H.M. Habibur Rahman and Abdul Hasib JJ. While the Senior Judge Md Habibur Rahman J. rejected the writs summarily, the Junior Judge of the Bench Abdul Hasib J. issued Rule Nishi upon the government to show cause as to why the Act should not be declared ultra vires the Constitution. Ultimately the issue was thrown to the Single Bench consisting Anwarul Hoque Chowdhury J. Barrister Amirul Islam appearing on behalf of the AL MPs argued that by the 1991 Act., the vice of Article 70 would be unnecessarily extended to the Presidential Election. MPs voting in Open Ballot shall run the risk of losing his seat, if he votes against the presidential candidate nominated by his party. Article 70 puts restraints on legislative and policy stance of the MPs by prohibiting them from voting against their party decision. It should govern the essential legislative functions of the MPs. Election of the President, being an extra ordinary special function, cannot be brought within the operation of Article 70, Barrister Amir argued.22 This argument of Barrister Amirul Islam points the finger to the core philosophy behind the inclusion of Article 70 in the Constitution. If the sole purpose of Article 70 is to prevent malicious defection and unnecessary defeat of the Cabinet in the floor, it should be limited only to the essential legislative affaires. The intention of the framers of the Constitution not to allow Article 70 operate in Presidential Election was evident in the Second Schedule of the original Constitution which provided for Open Ballot voting. On the other hand, Barrister M Aminul islam, the then Attorney General, took a strict and conservative stance. To support the open Ballot voting, he argued that political parties should get priority above all in public affaires. MPs are bound by the basis of party and so the electorate of a particular electoral area has to know for whom their representatives are voting.

20 Floor crossing in the House by M. Abdul Mondul 21 44 DLR 354. 22 Ibid para 8.


While dismissing the writ petition, the Court upheld the Attorney General’s contention in toto. Much literally, the Court emphasized on the necessity of following the party line: There is a self imposed restriction in Constitution itself which Speak of the role of a political party and its manner of influence upon a member of a political party, voted to Parliament under its ticket. A MPs is thus not a free agent to act while voting in Parliament. Secretary, Parliament Secretariat V. Khandker Delwar23 This was an appeal arising out of the High Court Division verdict in Khandker Delwar Hossain V. The Speaker 51 DLR 1 discussed above. In this case one of the issues for consideration was how to interpret the term ‘resign’ used in Article 70. BNP claimed that two have resigned the Awami League government should be ‘deemed to have resigned’ from their party and hence their seat in parliament was vacated as per Article 70. The Attorney General, Advocate Mahmudul Islam advocated a literal approach in the interpretation of Article 70. He argued that, Article 70 is a restriction on the freedom of conscience and on the rights of members of Parliament and its reach cannot be extended beyond the literal meaning of the language used there. To substantiate his point, Mahmudul Islam referred to the Explanation in Article 70. It gives a wider meaning to the act of ‘voting’ in Parliament by using the words ‘deemed to have voted’ in relation to certain activities. The word ‘resign’ has not been given any wider meaning by words like ‘deemed to have resigned.’ There cannot be any ‘resign’ if it is not a ‘formal renunciation or relinquishment of an office.’24 Barrister Moudud Ahmed appearing on behalf of BNP, argued that the Constitution of BNP includes a provision describing some activities on the part of it members in which he shall be ‘deemed to have resigned’ from the party. In response, Advocate Mahmudul Islam argued that while the framers of the Constitution were framing it in 1972, they were not any provision of their constitution cannot come to aid in interpretation of Article 70.

In this turn Barrister Moudud Ahmed again submitted that Article 152 of the Constitution has defined and recognized the political parties as constitutional entities. So the members of a political party must subscribe allegiance to it. Emphasizing on the necessity, he urged the Court to upheld ‘the spirit of Article 70.’

23 19 BLD(AD) 276 24 Ibid Para 8.

18


The Court accepted the ‘progressive’ interpretation of Moudud Ahmed and the term ‘resign’ was extended to mean ‘deemed to resign’ as well. The seats of the two State Ministers were declared to be vacant. 4.4 Comments Vacation of parliament seat by a lawmaker on ground of his defection, yet some constitutional experts and members of civil society argue that Article 70 of our constitution "contradicts the fundamental rights as enunciated in Part 111 of the constitution, thereby curbing the rights of the MPs also, as far as freedom of thought and expression is concerned." It has also been argued that "Article 70 has, in effect, usurped the powers of the MPs to defend the cause of the people -- more specifically the electorate, who voted them to parliament." It is further argued that some parliamentary democracies having no such thing as Article 70 of our constitution have not suffered from political instability. They have suggested to suitably amend Article 70 "incorporating the option of an MP to vote according to his conscience except on three fundamental and vital issues, vis-a-vis, (a) when a vote of censure or no-confidence is brought against a particular government, the concerned MP shall invariably vote for the party on whose ticket he was elected; (b) he shall not vote against the Finance Bill or against the smooth passage of the annual budget in whatever form it is placed and presented; (c) on sensitive defense matters which may be debated in camera, if needed. And except when a motion of no-confidence is moved, the members of parliament may be allowed to speak freely on any other subject maintaining the decorum of the House as far as possible." The other group of constitutional experts and knowledgeable people argue that Article 70 of our constitution "was framed after much thought to ensure stability and strengthen parliamentary democracy."25 Article 70 was incorporated in our Constitution to avoid floor crossing, but Art 70 is vague and indefinite not exhaustive. During the 7th Parliament a number of issues arose under Art. 70 of the Constitution. Two honorable MPs from BNP joined the Awami League government without resignation. Further another honorable MP from JP joined the AL government (consensus government). None of them resigned from their original party nor voted against the party. They were expelled from their parties. The Constitution is silent over this. The question is whether voting against the party on one single occasion is more offensive then the expulsion from the party.26

Chapter Five Vacation for Absence from Parliament 25 Parliament Rules of Procedure: A Quest for Democracy-Barrister Rabia khatun. Pp79 26 A Greater Role For Parliament: Rules and the reality. Pp123


5.1 General: The Bangladeshi brand of parliamentary democracy is a species peculiar in itself. During the first two decades (1971-1991) of our history, parliament as an institution suffered a total inattention. In the next two decades (1991-2010) it has been able to draw some focus though not much for its role play. Absence, causal presence, irregular attendance and regular boycott have drastically reduced its capability. It has developed a credibility crisis as well. In an ingenious bid to make politics 'difficult for the politicians', peoples with questionable disposition found their place in politics and parliament en masse. And hence the allegations of misusing the duty free car import facility, telephone, medical, travel, dwelling and entertainment allowances do not surprise us any more. Recently added to these is the allegation of misappropriation of AC, refrigerator, furniture and even chal-dalnoon-tel from parliament cafeteria. Outside the parliament, patronizing the terrorists is a rule rather than an exception. Though there are some rules of conduct in the Rules of Procedure to make the Members behave within the House, absence of a full pledged Code of Conduct controlling both the indoor and outdoor activities has contributed to damage the collective image of the Parliament. Given the situation, the recently tabled Private Member Bill proposing a Code of Conduct for MPs shows us a stream in the desert. The Bill lays down some behavioral norms which the Members of Parliament shall follow in discharging their duties. Section 4(2)(a)-(g) delineate the principles of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. The Members shall declare personal interests and take steps to resolve any conflict of interest in a way that protects the public interest. There shall be openness regarding their decisions and actions. They must give reasons behind their decisions and may restrict information only when the wider public interest clearly demands. They shall take decisions solely in terms of the public interest and not to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family or friends. They shall not place themselves under any financial or other obligation to outside individuals or organizations that might influence the performance of duties.27 5.2 Reason for this provision in the constitution: The constitution of Bangladesh provides that a member of parliament shall vacate his seat if he is absent from parliament, without the leave of parliament, for ninety consecutive sitting days. Rules of procedure of parliament (ROP) clarify that leave of absence applied for at any one time shall not exceed a period of ninety days. Let us now see what the constitutions in some countries including our neighboring countries say on the vacation of seat by an MP on grounds of his absence from the sessions and / or sittings of parliament. According to the constitution of India, if for a period of sixty days a member of either House (the Council of States or the House of People) of parliament is without permission of the House absent from all meetings thereof, the House may declare his seat vacant. Rules of procedure and conduct of business in Lok Sabha (House of People) clarifies that leave of absence applied for at any one time shall not exceed a period of sixty days. The constitution of Pakistan says that a House (the National Assembly or the Senate) may declare the seat of a member vacant if, without leave of the House, he remains absent for forty consecutive days of sittings.

27 20

M. Jashim Ali Chowdhury, The Code of Conduct Bill for MPs: Some Reflections, the Daily Star,28 August,2009.


The 1990 constitution of Nepal provides that the seat of a member of parliament shall become vacant if he, without the leave of the concerned House (the House of Representatives or the National Assembly), absents himself from thirty consecutive meetings of the House. The constitution of Fiji provides that the place of a member of the House of Representatives becomes vacant if he is absent from two consecutive meetings of the House without having obtained the permission of the Speaker to be absent. The place of a member of the Senate becomes vacant if he is absent from two consecutive meetings of the Senate without having obtained the permission of the President of the Senate. According to the Australian constitution, the place of a senator shall become vacant if for two consecutive months of any session of the Parliament he, without the permission of the Senate, fails to attend the Senate. The place of a member of the House of Representatives shall become vacant if for two consecutive months of any session of the Parliament he, without the permission of the House, fails to attend the House. The 1996 constitution of South Africa provides that a person loses membership of the National Assembly if that person is absent from the Assembly without permission in circumstances for which the rules and orders of the Assembly prescribes loss of membership. It appears from the above discussion that the lawmakers of Bangladesh enjoy the privilege of leave of absence from the sittings of the House for the maximum days. 5.3 Practice While speaking in parliament on June 29 the minister for local govern-ment, rural development and cooperatives and secretary general of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan suggested enactment of law with provisions that would lead to vacation of a lawmaker's seat if he was absent from parliament, without leave, for ten consecutive sittings. Also this would disqualify him from taking part in the election for one term. There have been mixed reactions to the above proposals. The main opposition Awami League's (AL) secretary general Abdul Jalil has termed the proposals as digging the BNP's own grave. In his reaction Gonoforum general secretary Saifuddin Manik has said that something should be done to make parliament effective and to create an atmosphere where the opposition can speak without hindrance. Workers Party president Rashed Khan Menon has termed the proposals as an insult to the lawmakers. It is expected that some other opposition political parties will shortly come up with their reactions. The civil society leaders, the print media and others raised proposals earlier to substantially reduce the leave of absence of the MPs from the sittings of parliament. The question arises as to why the leave of absence of the MPs should be substantially reduced? First, countries having a parliamentary system of government normally have bi-cameral legislature. But Bangladesh has got a unicameral legislature in which is vested the legislative powers of the Republic. A bi-cameral legislature in countries such as Britain, India, Australia, Canada provides checks and balances in lawmaking. The members of unicameral parliament of Bangladesh are not only responsible for making laws but also for other matters ancillary thereto. These include, inter alia,(I) electing the President of Bangladesh, (ii) electing the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker of parliament, (iii) participating in the deliberations of parliamentary standing committees on ministries and other parliamentary committees, (iv)


asking questions in the House on the performance of the ministries, departments, autonomous bodies and enterprises, (v) moving resolutions in the House relating to matters of general public interest, (vi) moving a motion expressing want of confidence in the cabinet, (vii) removing the Speaker or the Deputy Speaker, (viii) impeaching the President. To discharge the above functions and responsibilities properly, the legislators have to regularly attend the sittings of the House and keep them busy in the House and within the precincts of the House. Second, boycotting the parliament sessions and sittings has been a perennial problem since the reintroduction of parliamentary system of government in the country through the Constitution (Twelfth Amendment) Act, 1991. During the last thirteen- plus years of rule of the two major political parties namely the BNP and the AL, the main opposition party has resorted to hartals and sustained boycott of parliament. The process is still on. The sole objective of boycotting parliament by the main opposition party from time to time has been to make parliament dysfunctional and thereby force the party or alliance in power to step down. The sustained boycott of parliament by the main opposition party from time to time has not only obstructed the functioning of parliament but also put the nascent democracy of the country at stake. So, there is need for legal measures to make it obligatory for the lawmakers to attend the sittings of parliament. Third, it has been noticed that during the last thirteen years or so, the lawmakers of the main opposition party have taken advantage of article 67 (1) (b) of the constitution, which saves their seats in the House even if they remain absent from parliament without leave of absence of parliament for eighty-nine consecutive sitting days. This period normally encompasses more than one session of parliament. Instances are there to show that during a period of eighty-nine consecutive sitting days, MPs from the main opposition party attended sitting(s) of parliament for a day or so to save their seats. But they have never hesitated to take all the remuneration and privileges of lawmakers without discharging their constitutional responsibilities. Last but not the least, it appears that in the countries having a long tradition of parliamentary democracy the leave of absence of the MPs does not exceed sixty days. Bangladesh has little experience of parliamentary democracy. According to political scientists and analysts, the success of a parliamentary democracy depends upon a number of factors such as democratic spirit of tolerance, devoted sense of respect and relentless response towards the institutionalism of democracy. Bangladesh is yet to satisfy the above conditions for the successful functioning of parliamentary democracy. This necessitates a vibrating parliament which is possible with the participation of lawmakers belonging to the ruling party/ alliance and the opposition. To conclude, the greater national interest demands substantial reduction in the leave of absence of the MPs. The leave of absence at any one time should not exceed thirty consecutive sitting days.28

Chapter Six 6.1 Findings: 28 .M. Abdul Latif Mondal, Reducing the leave of absence from parliament pp 256 22


Evidence shows that the presence of a powerful legislature is an unmixed blessing for democratization. Parliament, being subject to popular election, must adhere to the wishes of the people. Therefore, the laws made by delegates of the people in parliament will accord with the people’s will. Again the executive Government, being responsible to the parliament for the exercise of executive powers, is a accountable, albeit indirectly, to the people. In this sense, the whole of the democratic process circles round the parliament 29. So effective parliament has been required qualified members. Bearing this in mind constitution as well as other laws provides some guideline in this respect. But problem is still found because of the lack of that instruction. Besides this, some much needed requirement has been avoided for which still a strong parliament has not been made. After completing a whole research found following problems: Firstly, the main provision stating vacation of seats in the parliament is Article 67. It states a member of parliament shall vacate his seat if he has incurred a disqualification under clause (2) of Article 66. But unfortunately Article 66 (2) does not mention educational disqualification. A representative of the people who leads a nation does not require an educational background is unthinkable. Secondly, Article 70 has a serious impact over the functioning of the parliament 30. Much ink has already been spent over Article 70, the most controversial provision of the constitution. Article 70 is widely accused to push democracy in a back seat 31. While framers of the constitution and political forces happening in power are blamed for the failure of separation of power in Bangladesh, the judiciary may not totally avoid the burden. Thirdly, originally a citizen of Bangladesh could not acquire citizenship of another state without losing Bangladeshi citizenship. After the 1978 amendment of citizenship law it is now possible. This amendment in contrary to Article 66 (2) of the constitution, a person shall be disqualified for election as, or for being Member of Parliament, if he acquires the citizenship of a foreign state. Fourthly, Article 12 (1) of the Representation of the peoples order, 1972 states that a person shall be disqualified to be or to continue as a member of parliament if he being a loanee of other than a loan for agricultural purpose, has defaulted in repaying the loan 29 M. Jashim Ali Chowdhury, An Introduction to the Constitutional Law of Bangladesh, Northan University Bangladesh, 1st Edition, Dhaka 2010, P.- 325. 30 Ibid, page- 155. 31 Md. ziaur Rahman, Democracy: Freedom of speech and floor-Coro-ssing interface, The Northern University Journal Law, Vol. I- (2010), PP. 24-42.


or any installment at least seven days before the submission of nomination paper 32. But in Bangladesh there are number of member of the parliament who are the defaulter of loan. 6.2 Recommendations: Rule of law is the main key point or the implementation of the democracy. So in order make a proper rule of law, following suggestion should be followed: (a) Regarding Article 70 it should be suitably amend article 70

incorporating the option of an MP to vote according to his conscience except on three fundamental and vital issues, vis-a-vis, (a) When a vote of censure or no-confidence is brought against a particular government the concerned MP shall invariably vote for the party on whose ticket he was elected (b) he shall not vote against the finance Bill or against the smooth passage of the annual budget in whatever from it is placed and presented (c) con sensitive defense matters which may be debated in camera, if needed. And except when a motion of no-confidence is moved, the member of parliament may be allowed to speak freely on any other subject maintain the decorum of the house as for as possible. (b) There should be an inclusion of a provision in Article 66 (2) that a

member of the parliament should be educated. He must be graduate one. Besides this, he must have a good educational background. (c) It is surprising that a law contrary to the supreme law of the land is still

continuing. A member of the parliament must be a citizen of Bangladesh and not other state. So the contrary law should be repealed. (d) It is unexpected but true that the defaulter of loan in a maximum

number is the Member of Parliament. The law is only on pen and paper. There is no implementation of law to prevent this bad practice. The judiciary should play a great role here. (e) After the independence of Bangladesh still we don’t see an effective

democracy. Many governments have been changed but the change in 32 The Representation of the peoples order, 1972, Article 12 (1)

24


democracy in simply deco. This is because still we have not found a complete separation of powers. As the Member of Parliament represent the legislature and executive as well so change of their infrastructure through binding rules is mandatory.

Conclusion: A member of parliament shall vacate his seat on two ways. First- On the ground of illegality second- On resignation. The second one is very hardly seen in Bangladesh. But the first is the only case where a member shall vacate his seat. Vacation of seat in the parliament connected with the most important issue like-effective parliament. Rule of law, Separation of judiciary, separation of power, Responsible executive. The disqualification of member of the parliament does not given the power to EC to vacate his seat unless the disqualification is properly found out. On the other hand, bearing that guideline if a member continues his proceeding in parliament democracy will ortainly be established?

Profile for lawjuris

Bar  

Though our orientation with parliament is much longer than many other developing countries, the first two decades (1971-90) of Bangladeshi P...

Bar  

Though our orientation with parliament is much longer than many other developing countries, the first two decades (1971-90) of Bangladeshi P...

Profile for lawjuris
Advertisement