Independent Judiciary and reasonable Security of Judges : Safeguarding Justice in Bangladesh

Repoter : News Room
Published: 21 May, 2025 6:46 pm

Faijul Islam

Faijul Islam : An independent judiciary is a foundational pillar of a democratic state governed by the rule of law. However, recent incidents—including verbal attacks and public humiliation of judges raise serious concerns about judicial independence and security in Bangladesh. This article critically analyzes the implications of such incidents with a special focus on the Keraniganj Model Police Station case involving an attempted murder accusation against Hanif Member there and the subsequent reactions from legal professionals.

It explores the balance between legal advocacy to courtroom decorum, and judicial protection which advocating for systemic reforms to ensure a safe, independent, and accountable judiciary. The independence of the judiciary is not only a constitutional mandate but also a moral value and legal necessity for upholding justice to protecting fundamental rights and maintaining public confidence in legal institutions. Recent courtroom confrontations more particularly involving aggressive behavior by lawyers that reveal a worrisome trend that threatens the rule of law in Bangladesh.

The Keraniganj Incident: A Case in Point

On 12 May 2025, an accused named Hanif Member charged with attempted murder surrendered before the court and applied for bail. After careful consideration, the court rejected his bail petition and ordered his imprisonment. Upon a second bail application on 17 May the court again denied the request. However, what followed was an unprecedented act of disorder and disrespect to the judgeship. A group of lawyers dissatisfied with the court’s decision, then openly criticized the judge using terms like “fascist collaborator” and “agent of the ruling party.”

They also allegedly threw out the cause list by challenging the judge’s authority and dignity in a public courtroom an act caught on social media and widely circulated in that time .After one lawyer questioned the legitimacy of the case documentation while another invoked political sentiments chanting personal risk under the current government.

Legal Ethics and Courtroom Decorum

Advocacy is the practice of legal mandate. Lawyers are entitled—indeed obligated—to represent their clients with conviction. However, such representation must be exercised within the bounds of legal ethics and professional conduct mismanagement . According to the Bangladesh Bar Council Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette, lawyers must uphold the dignity of the court refraining from scandalous or offensive remarks and maintain decorum even in the face of unfavorable decisions in the docket room. Even Publicly humiliating a judge not only violates ethical codes but also destabilizes the sanctity of the judicial process right now.. The courtroom is not a political platform; it is a temple of justice where decisions are to be challenged through legal remedies such as appeals or review petitions—not through intimidation or defamation.

Judicial Independence Under Threat

The separation of powers enshrined in Articles 94–116A of the Constitution of Bangladesh guarantees the independence of the judiciary. This independence is twofold: (i) institutional independence where the judiciary operates free from executive interference and (ii) personal independence where judges are free from coercion threats, misconduct or undue influence. When judges are publicly insulted or threatened their independence is directly compromised. The chilling effect such incidents have may discourage fair adjudication, especially in politically sensitive or high-profile cases. If judges fear reprisal or character assassination by their ability to deliver impartial verdicts diminishes weakening public trust in the justice system.

Comparative Jurisprudence: Lessons from Other Jurisdictions

First Countries like India, the UK, and Canada have established strong frameworks to protect judicial officers. For example, in India the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 penalizes acts that lower the authority of the judiciary. In the United States the Judicial Improvements Act 1990 includes safety mechanisms for federal judges. But in Bangladesh lacks adequate legislative and procedural tools to ensure the personal safety of judges particularly in the face of digital aggression to political polarization and public backlash. The use of social media to vilify judges adds another layer of complexity which necessitates a rethinking of legal protection mechanisms.

Need for Judicial Security and Disciplinary Accountability

While independence is crucial then accountability must not be ignored. A transparent disciplinary framework should hold all judges and lawyers equally accountable for their actions. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh has the authority to issue contempt notices or initiate disciplinary proceedings system against lawyers who breach ethical lines. Simultaneously, the Judicial Service Commission must work in assistance with law enforcement agencies to ensure the safety of judicial officers both inside and outside courtrooms. The authority must establish Surveillance, digital monitoring, and rapid-response protection for institutionalizing of the judicial infrastructure.

Recommendations

Establish a Judicial Protection Unit under the Ministry of Law to provide security support to judges in high-risk cases.
Amend the Bar Council Canons to include stricter penalties for courtroom misconduct and defamation of judges.
Set up Social Media Monitoring Cells to identify and counter defamatory content targeting judges and courts.
Introduce Judicial Awareness Training for lawyers and law students, focusing on courtroom behavior, ethics, and professionalism.
Ensure swift contempt proceedings in response to direct attacks on judicial authority to uphold institutional integrity.

The judiciary is the last resort for citizens seeking justice. So Undermining its independence—whether through verbal assault or political intimidation or public humiliation not only affects individual cases but corrodes the entire legal framework of the nation aftermath. The incident at the Keraniganj Model Court should serve as a wake-up call for urgent reforms quickly .For preserving the rule of law in Bangladesh, it is imperative to reaffirm our commitment to an independent judiciary and to ensure that the men and women who uphold justice are themselves protected, honoured, respected and empowered.