The recent appointment of 265 law officers in the Attorney General's Office has once again created intense unease and anger among Supreme Court lawyers. A demand has been raised for the immediate removal of several appointees, labeling them as ‘latent accomplices and clandestine agents’. Concurrently, allegations of excluding many highly qualified lawyers who have been actively involved in political movements for a long time have further complicated the situation. Deep speculation and discussions are ongoing among lawyers regarding the ultimate outcome of this controversial appointment process.
It is learned that senior Supreme Court lawyers and responsible individuals from both the government and BNP are actively discussing to resolve the situation arising from this appointment process. Assurances have also come from relevant circles to reach an acceptable solution through discussions with the agitated lawyers. A section of lawyers has alleged that many individuals have been appointed who were not active in anti-Awami League movements during the previous government's tenure, but are rather known as politically controversial. According to them, such appointments are severely damaging the image of the Attorney General's Office.
In this regard, BNP lawyer Gazi Kamrul Islam Sajal alleged that strong resentment has arisen among lawyers in protest against the appointment of ‘fascist accomplices’. He claimed that some clandestine and latent fascist accomplices have found a place on the new list, while many experienced lawyers who have been at the forefront of movements and struggles for a long time have been excluded. He further stated that if these controversial individuals remain in the Attorney General's Office, there is a perceived risk of compromising state security and confidentiality.
Gazi Kamrul Islam Sajal further informed that the Attorney General also bears some responsibility regarding the entire appointment matter. However, it is also learned that he was not fully aware of the complete picture of the appointments and is in a positive position regarding the exclusion of controversial individuals. He also mentioned that responsible individuals from BNP and the government, along with senior lawyers, are discussing to resolve the issue. In this situation, questions have been raised about the transparency and accountability of the Attorney General's Office, which many fear could also have a negative impact on the country's judicial system.
Advocate Mohammad Ali, Secretary of the Supreme Court Bar Association, stated that discussions regarding the re-appointment process in the Attorney General's Office had been ongoing for a long time. However, many dedicated and long-serving lawyers of the party have been excluded from the new list, which is extremely disappointing. Expressing dissatisfaction with the language of protest, he said that if there is any problem, it should be resolved through discussion. He expressed hope that there is still an opportunity to re-appoint many who were excluded and who previously served as law officers.
Former judge and Supreme Court lawyer Faisal Mahmud Foizi has termed this appointment process condemnable and problematic. According to him, many who were involved in anti-fascist movements for the past 17 years and suffered various forms of harassment and torture have been excluded this time. He alleged that instead of merit, factors like nepotism, political recommendations, chamber relationships, kinship, and regionalism influenced these appointments. He also claimed that affiliation with Dhaka University was given importance in some instances.
According to Faisal Mahmud Foizi, it is not necessary to appoint everyone from a specific lawyers' forum, but it is extremely important to ensure that no one associated with the Awami League or autocratic rule is appointed to the Attorney General's Office. He further stated that the expectations created among lawyers after the July movement were not reflected in this appointment process. He believes that since Prime Minister Tareque Rahman has adopted a ‘zero tolerance’ policy against corruption, there is an opportunity to investigate and rectify any irregularities in the appointments.
Considering the overall situation, a swift and impartial solution is urgently needed for the deep dissatisfaction and controversy surrounding the appointment of law officers in the Attorney General's Office. Appointing controversial individuals while excluding qualified and patriotic lawyers will not only damage the image of the Attorney General's Office but also weaken public trust in the country's entire judicial system. Therefore, experienced circles believe that investigating all allegations and ensuring a transparent and merit-based appointment process is now the primary duty of all concerned.
