Independent Judiciary in Bangladesh: Learning from Global Models and a Path Forwar

Kazi Ayman Awsaf : As Bangladesh finds itself at a critical juncture in its democratic journey, the demand for an absolutely independent judiciary is timely and must be paramount. It is the truth that lacunae still exist in the system, with the executive interference unabated, with antiquated laws, and with political manipulations. Without far-reaching reforms, justice will remain a matter of personal privilege rather than a protected right.

Executive Influence in Judicial Appointments

A big obstacle in achieving a truly independent judiciary in Bangladesh lies within the appointment process of its judges. Under Article 48(3) of the Constitution, the President, in appointment of judges, shall act in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister. Hence, the process is, de facto, an executive process.

This is clearly different from the situation in countries like Pakistan and Indonesia, where more balanced models have been developed.

• In Pakistan, judicial appointments are made by a Judicial Commission consisting of the Chief Justice, senior judges, and legal experts. The nominations are then reviewed by a bipartisan parliamentary committee that includes opposition members.

• In Indonesia, the Judicial Commission is constitutionally mandated to recommend justices and monitor their integrity through a rigorous vetting process.

These models ensure that the judiciary remains insulated from executive interference.

Roadmap for Judicial Reform in Bangladesh

Chief Justice Syed Refaat Ahmed has proposed a reform roadmap which includes establishing an independent judicial secretariat under the Supreme Court. This body would be in charge of appointments, promotions, and disciplinary actions—completely separate from the executive—and staffed by judges and legal professionals, not political appointees.

This approach is aligned with the principle that justice must be done and must be seen to be done.

Four Institutional Pillars (P4) and Their Failures

Judicial independence also depends on the integrity of four institutions—Prosecutors, Pleaders, Police, and the Penal Code (P4)—each of which is currently compromised in Bangladesh.

• Attorney General’s Office has become politically aligned, losing its neutrality.

• Prosecutors are often pushed for hasty convictions, compromising procedural justice. For example, in Tunisia, prosecutors enjoy the same constitutional protections as judges.

• Lawyers are heavily politicized, causing friction and diminishing trust. According to UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, legal professionals should remain professionally independent—something lacking in Bangladesh.

• Police in Bangladesh are often accused of political bias and rights violations. Countries like Sierra Leone and Indonesia have implemented judicial oversight commissions to ensure police accountability.

Obsolete Penal Code

Bangladesh still relies on the British-era Criminal Procedure Code (1860). Unlike India and Pakistan, Bangladesh has not reformed these colonial laws, resulting in excessive police powers and restricted fundamental rights.

The Path Forward

Structural reforms must go beyond law—they must also affect institutions and legal culture. Justice Syed Refaat Ahmed’s roadmap, coupled with best practices from global models, offers a practical and timely solution.

An independent judiciary is a cornerstone of democracy. It upholds equality, checks government power, and ensures justice for all. Bangladesh must make this its priority—delaying reform will only erode justice and public faith in the courts.

Author Kazi Ayman Awsaf is a Student of Law, East West University