3 Novo Theatre corruption cases against PM Hasina quashed
Watchdog ACC took wrong way round in suing the top politician: HC
Dhaka, Mar 4 (UNB)-The High Court Thursday scrapped three graft cases against incumbent Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina concerning the construction of Bangabandhu Novo Theatre as the anti-corruption watchdog took the wrong way round in suing the top politician.
In its judgment the court declared “illegal” Anti-Corruption Commission chairman's approval of investigation and the filing of the charge sheet of the cases by an anti-corruption officer, without following the due course of law.
During the past BNP-Jamaat alliance rule, the now-defunct Bureau of Anti-Corruption (BAC) had filed the three cases with Tejgaon police station on March 27, 2002, accusing Hasina and some of her cabinet members of committing corruption and irregularities in the Novo Theatre project during her previous tenure.
With a view to moulding the mind of the people as science-oriented, the Awami League government during (1996-2001) period built the Novo Theatre with most modern architectural looks in the capital where planetarium show, Ride Simulator, 3-D film show and some scientific exhibits are displayed.
The project was established by the Ministry of Science and Information Communication Technology with an expenditure of over Tk 123 crore which was provided entirely from the state coffers.
Delivering the judgment upon a writ petition filed by Sheikh Hasina, a division bench comprising Justice AHM Shamsuddin Chowdhury and Justice Borhan Uddin made its rule issued earlier absolute.
On October 27, 2005, the High Court upon Hasina’s petition stayed the operation of the approval given by the Anti-Corruption Commission chairman for the investigation into the three cases of corruption against the then former PM, Sheikh Hasina.
The HC also had asked the ACC and the government to show cause as to why the ACC chairman's approval of investigation and the filing of the charge sheet by an anti-corruption officer should not be declared illegal.
In August 24, 2005, after dissolving the BAC, the newly constituted ACC revived the cases from the shelf.
The HC in its observation termed mala fide and politically motivated the action of the ACC chairman in initiating the cases as the ACC boss alone does not have the jurisdiction in this regard since the Commission is a composite body.
The court dubbed the litigation process an attempt to malign the popularity of Sheikh Hasina, the Awami League chief who is now ruling the country for a second time after rebuilding the party following the August 15, 1975 tragedy.
“The ACC chairman cannot dictate terms to the investigation officer for completing the investigation and filing the memorandum of evidence (charge sheet) as soon as possible,” the HC says in its observations of the high-profile graft cases.
Besides, a series of cases cannot be initiated against any person on the same nature of offence “in violation of the constitution”, said the court, referring to the article 35 (2) of the constitution.
The article reads: “No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.”
The High Court also charged the ACC with inordinate delay in disposing of the cases, as the constitution gives every accused the right to get speedy disposal of trial.
In its judgment the court observed that appointing consultant and additional expenditure against estimated cost of the project, including purchase of instruments, do not constitute any offence as it was done through due process of the Rules of Business.
Barrister Rafique-ul Huq, assisted by Barrister Fazle Noor Tapash, appeared for Sheikh Hasina.
In its judgment the court declared “illegal” Anti-Corruption Commission chairman's approval of investigation and the filing of the charge sheet of the cases by an anti-corruption officer, without following the due course of law.
During the past BNP-Jamaat alliance rule, the now-defunct Bureau of Anti-Corruption (BAC) had filed the three cases with Tejgaon police station on March 27, 2002, accusing Hasina and some of her cabinet members of committing corruption and irregularities in the Novo Theatre project during her previous tenure.
With a view to moulding the mind of the people as science-oriented, the Awami League government during (1996-2001) period built the Novo Theatre with most modern architectural looks in the capital where planetarium show, Ride Simulator, 3-D film show and some scientific exhibits are displayed.
The project was established by the Ministry of Science and Information Communication Technology with an expenditure of over Tk 123 crore which was provided entirely from the state coffers.
Delivering the judgment upon a writ petition filed by Sheikh Hasina, a division bench comprising Justice AHM Shamsuddin Chowdhury and Justice Borhan Uddin made its rule issued earlier absolute.
On October 27, 2005, the High Court upon Hasina’s petition stayed the operation of the approval given by the Anti-Corruption Commission chairman for the investigation into the three cases of corruption against the then former PM, Sheikh Hasina.
The HC also had asked the ACC and the government to show cause as to why the ACC chairman's approval of investigation and the filing of the charge sheet by an anti-corruption officer should not be declared illegal.
In August 24, 2005, after dissolving the BAC, the newly constituted ACC revived the cases from the shelf.
The HC in its observation termed mala fide and politically motivated the action of the ACC chairman in initiating the cases as the ACC boss alone does not have the jurisdiction in this regard since the Commission is a composite body.
The court dubbed the litigation process an attempt to malign the popularity of Sheikh Hasina, the Awami League chief who is now ruling the country for a second time after rebuilding the party following the August 15, 1975 tragedy.
“The ACC chairman cannot dictate terms to the investigation officer for completing the investigation and filing the memorandum of evidence (charge sheet) as soon as possible,” the HC says in its observations of the high-profile graft cases.
Besides, a series of cases cannot be initiated against any person on the same nature of offence “in violation of the constitution”, said the court, referring to the article 35 (2) of the constitution.
The article reads: “No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.”
The High Court also charged the ACC with inordinate delay in disposing of the cases, as the constitution gives every accused the right to get speedy disposal of trial.
In its judgment the court observed that appointing consultant and additional expenditure against estimated cost of the project, including purchase of instruments, do not constitute any offence as it was done through due process of the Rules of Business.
Barrister Rafique-ul Huq, assisted by Barrister Fazle Noor Tapash, appeared for Sheikh Hasina.
Comments
No Comments on this News
