Why speaker administering presidential oath should not be deemed illegal? asks HC
Law secretary, cabinet secretary, and other relevant officials have been asked to respond to the rule within four weeks
The High Court has issued a rule asking why the administration of the presidential oath by the speaker of parliament should not be declared illegal.
The bench of Justice AKM Asaduzzaman issued the rule this afternoon (11 March). Barrister Omar Faruk represented the petitioner during the hearing.
The law secretary, cabinet secretary, and other relevant officials have been asked to respond to the rule within four weeks.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
The rule comes after a writ petition was filed yesterday (10 March) challenging the legality of the speaker administering the presidential oath.
The petition, filed by lyricist and constitutional analyst Shahidullah Farazi through his lawyer Omar Faruk, seeks a directive that the chief justice should administer the oath to the president instead.
"Under Bangladesh's original constitution, the president was sworn in by the chief justice. However, a later amendment introduced the provision allowing the speaker to administer the oath to the president," Barrister Faruq told reporters after the writ petition.
"The petition argues that just as the president administers the oath to the chief justice, the chief justice should also administer the oath to the president," he added.
