The 15th Amendment to the Constitution, approved by the Parliament on June 30, retains at least 14 Articles or provisions of the Fifth Amendment which was declared void by the Supreme Court, necessitating the latest amendment.
The Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Bill 2011 was passed by 291 votes, with only independent lawmaker Mohammad Fazlul Azim voting against it and five ruling alliance lawmakers voting in favour with objections to five of the 54 amendments, in the absence of the opposition which has been boycotting the Parliament for a long time.
The amendments will come into effect after they have been signed by country's president and gazetted officially.
The approved amendment retains 'Bismillah'
before the preamble with a change in its translation.
It replaces the translation of the invocation 'Bismillah-Ar-Rahman-Ar-Rahim — 'In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful' — by 'In the name of the Creator, the Merciful'.
Article 6 has been replaced with a new one that says, '(1) The citizenship of Bangladesh shall be determined and regulated by law. (2) The people of Bangladesh shall be known as Bangalees as a nation and the citizens of Bangladesh shall be known as Bangladeshis.'
The Article, before being changed by the Fifth Amendment, said, '(1) The citizenship of Bangladesh shall be determined and regulated by law. (2) The citizens of Bangladesh shall be known as Bangladeshis.'
The approved amendment replaces the existing Article 10 by a new one, which says, 'A socialist economic system shall be established with a view to ensuring the attainment of a just and egalitarian society, free from exploitation of man by man.'
The existing Article 10, which was changed by the Fifth Amendment, says, 'Steps shall be taken to ensure participation of women in all spheres of national life.'
The approved amendment, however, retains the provision as it inserts a new clause in Article 19, saying, 'The state shall endeavour to ensure equality of opportunity and participation of women in all spheres of national life.'
It also retains the scrapping of the prohibition to form any political party or association based on religion.
It replaces the existing Article 38 by a new one that says, 'Every citizen shall have the right to form associations or unions, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interests of morality or public order.'
The text of the Article remains unchanged.
It, however, adds a proviso barring formation of any association or union 'for the purposes of destroying religious, social and communal harmony among the citizens; creating discrimination among citizens, on the ground of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or language; organising terrorist acts or militant activities against the state or the citizens or any other country; or the objects of which are inconsistent with the Constitution'.
The original proviso had said, 'Provided that no person shall have the right to form, or be a member or otherwise take part in the activities of, any communal or other association or union which in the name or on the basis of any religion has for its object, or pursues, a political purpose.'
The original proviso was omitted by the Fifth Amendment, thus allowing the formation of religion-based political parties.
The approved amendment retains Article 42(2), as it replaces the Article with a new one which has the same text.
The Article empowers the government to enact any law for acquisition, nationalisation or requisition of any private property after paying compensation and adds that no such law can be challenged in any court on the ground of inadequate compensation.
The original Article had empowered the government to make any such law for acquisition, nationalisation or requisition of any private property with or without compensation.
The existing Article 44, substituted by the Fifth Amendment, has been retained.
It reads: '(1) The right to move the High Court Division, in accordance with Clause (I) of Article 102, for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this part, is guaranteed.
'(2) Without prejudice to the powers of the High Court Division under Article 102, Parliament may by law empower any other court, within the local limits of its jurisdiction, to exercise all or any of those powers.'
The original Article, which also says almost the same with the replacement of the words 'High Court' for the words 'Supreme Court', was substituted by the existing Article by the Fourth Amendment that said, 'Parliament may by law establish a constitutional court, tribunal or commission for the enforcement of fundamental rights.'
The approved amendment retains Article 80 as amended by the Fifth Amendment, curtailing the country's president's power to withhold his assent to Bills passed by Parliament for enactment into laws.
It also retains the changes made to Article 88 by the Fifth Amendment.
It retains changes made to Article 93(1) empowering the president to promulgate ordinances 'at any time when Parliament stands dissolved or is not in session' instead of 'at any time when Parliament is not in session'.
It retains Article 96 that deals with the tenure and removal of the Supreme Court's judges and stipulates provisions of the Supreme Judicial Council for the removal of the judges.
Although the Article has been amended the text remains unchanged.
Article 102(1), which empowers the High Court to issue necessary orders to enforce fundamental rights, has also been retained. The Article was deleted by the Fourth Amendment but was restored by the Fifth Amendment.
Articles 115 and 116, which deal with the appointments to, and control and supervision of, the lower judiciary, have also been retained, although the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, in its verdict declaring the Fifth Amendment void, had observed that the original Articles 115 and 116 should be restored.
The highest court observed in its verdict, 'However, we are of the view that...unless Articles 115 and 116 are restored to their original position, independence of the judiciary will not be fully achieved.'
'It is our earnest hope that Articles 115 and 116 of the Constitution will be restored to their original position by the Parliament as soon as possible,' said the verdict.
Article 115, which absolutely empowers the president to appoint judges to the lower judiciary, has been retained.
The original Article said, 'Appointments of persons to offices in the judicial service or as magistrates exercising judicial functions shall be made by the President — (a) in the case of district judges, on the recommendation of the Supreme Court; and (b) in the case of any other person, in accordance with rules made by the President in that behalf after consulting the appropriate Public Service Commission and the Supreme Court.'
Although Article 116 has been replaced by a new one, its text has not been changed. It says, 'The control (including the power of posting, promotion and grant of leave) and discipline of persons employed in the judicial service and magistrates exercising judicial functions shall vest in the President and shall be exercised by him in consultation with the Supreme Court.'
The deletion of Part VIA, which dealt with one-party rule, has also been retained.
Source : New Age