1. Let’s start with a bit about your journey. What first drew you into law — and how would you describe the path that brought you from your early academic days to becoming a respected constitutional lawyer?
My journey into law has always been driven by a clear sense of purpose. From an early age, I knew I wanted to become a lawyer, a conviction that has remained unwavering. My father, a respected senior barrister at the Supreme Court, was my greatest inspiration. His dedication to the profession profoundly influenced me, and I aspired to follow in his footsteps.
I pursued my LLB at the London School of Economics and completed my bar training in 2004. Eager to begin my legal career, I returned to Bangladesh right after qualifying. One of the most fulfilling experiences of my life was the opportunity to work alongside my father, learning from his expertise and upholding the values he instilled in me. His legacy continues to guide me as I forge my own path in constitutional law.
2. You’ve spoken out on strengthening judicial independence in Bangladesh. In your view, why is the creation of a Supreme Court secretariat so crucial — and how can such reform actually be realized in the current political climate?
The establishment of a Supreme Court Secretariat is crucial to ensuring true judicial independence in Bangladesh. Without administrative and financial autonomy, the judiciary remains reliant on the executive branch—particularly the Law Ministry—for basic functions such as infrastructure, appointments, and resource allocation. As our Chief Justice has rightly stated, justice cannot be delivered on borrowed infrastructure. A separate secretariat would allow the judiciary to manage its own affairs, free from executive interference, which is essential for upholding the rule of law.
Given the current political climate, with a non-political caretaker government in place, this is the ideal moment to implement such a reform. History shows that political governments, regardless of their affiliation, have been reluctant to relinquish control over the judiciary. Over the past 25 years, every elected administration has sought to influence judicial administration to consolidate power. Now, with no political party in charge, we have a rare opportunity to enact this vital change.
However, progress has been frustratingly slow. The government must understand that its legitimacy depends on delivering meaningful reforms, including in the judiciary. Failure to act now risks eroding public trust. The demand for a Supreme Court Secretariat is not merely a legal necessity—it is a test of this government’s commitment to real, lasting change. The time to act is now—before the window closes with the return of a political government.
3. The appointment of the Chief Justice and other judges is always a sensitive topic. What would a more transparent, fair, and constitutionally sound appointment process look like?
The appointment of the Chief Justice and other judges is a matter of great constitutional significance. This year’s Supreme Court Judges Appointment Council Ordinance marks an important development, as it establishes, for the first time, a collective body of senior judges from both the Appellate and High Court Divisions, presided over by the Chief Justice. This body is now tasked with appointing honest, competent, and meritorious judges to the higher judiciary.
This new system is a positive step toward ensuring a more transparent and fair appointment process. However, to fully safeguard judicial independence, I believe the council’s composition should exclude the Attorney General. Otherwise, the government will be able through the office of the Attorney General to influence the appointment of Supreme Court Judges. The selection process should remain entirely within the judiciary’s domain, with Supreme Court judges themselves determining who is most qualified for elevation.
While some members of the bar have raised objections to the ordinance, we must recognize that the core principle of collective judicial decision-making in appointments is sound. If any flaws exist, they should be addressed through careful revision, rather than abandoning this progressive approach altogether.
Regarding the Chief Justice’s appointment, I strongly believe it must follow the principle of seniority. The most senior judge of the Appellate Division should automatically assume this position unless of course there are disciplinary proceedings pending against him. Any deviation from this practice would open the door to political favoritism, where loyalty to the government could overshadow judicial merit. The seniority principle serves as a crucial safeguard against executive interference in judicial appointments and in preserving the independence of the judiciary.
4. Supreme Court centralization is often seen as a structural challenge to justice access. What practical forms of decentralization do you believe are both achievable and constitutionally viable?
The issue of Supreme Court centralization poses significant challenges to access to justice. Both the Judiciary Reform Commission and the Constitution Reform Commission have recommended the establishment of permanent High Court Division benches across various divisions. This reform would significantly improve access to justice, allowing litigants from places like Chittagong to approach the High Court in their own division, rather than having to travel to Dhaka.
During constitutional reform discussions, the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics conducted an extensive survey across 64 districts, conducting interviews in over 15,000 households. More than 85% supported the idea of permanent High Court benches in divisions, clearly reflecting the public’s demand for decentralized justice.
However, the proposal has faced opposition from a section of the bar, who argue it would undermine the integrity of the Supreme Court and the unitary character of the Republic. While I understand these concerns, I believe the reform warrants serious consideration due to its potential to improve access to justice. Any significant structural changes, however, should be carefully implemented, with comprehensive consultations involving all stakeholders—particularly the bar and judiciary. Their views must be respected, as they will be directly impacted by this transformation. The success of this reform depends on gaining their trust and cooperation to ensure its effectiveness.
6. The legal world is evolving rapidly. What’s your impression of the new generation of lawyers entering the profession — particularly in Bangladesh? What advice would you give them to stay sharp and relevant in a system that now has to deal with increasingly complex global issues and modern legal frameworks? Also, how do you see artificial intelligence affecting the future of legal research, drafting, and even courtroom strategy?
The new generation of lawyers in Bangladesh is undoubtedly smarter and more tech-savvy than ever before. They understand how to leverage technology to enhance efficiency – we’re already seeing both senior and junior lawyers using AI-powered tools for legal research and drafting. These technologies are particularly useful for generating initial drafts of contracts, petitions and other documents that rely on standard formats and repetitive instructions.
However, we must remember that AI should serve as our assistant, not become our master. Over-dependence on these tools would be problematic because AI has clear limitations. What makes me optimistic is that young lawyers are using technology more effectively than their senior counterparts, especially when researching precedents from India, Pakistan, and the UK that we frequently cite in our arguments. This technological advantage, when properly harnessed, will enable them to bring about qualitative improvements in our profession.
The key is maintaining the right balance – using technology to enhance our work while preserving the essential human elements of legal practice. These young lawyers, with their tech skills combined with proper legal training, are well-positioned to elevate the standards of our profession in Bangladesh.
7. Bangladesh’s legal system still suffers from lengthy case backlogs and uneven legal representation. What reforms — institutional or constitutional — do you believe could make justice more accessible for ordinary citizens?
To address the challenges facing Bangladesh’s justice system, we urgently need more judges. Currently, there are only 90 judges in the High Court and 7 in the Appellate Division for a population of 180 million. It is essential to appoint more qualified judges and equip them with modern case management skills. The system lacks unified case management strategies, so implementing tools and training to streamline this process is crucial.
Introducing cost penalties for frivolous lawsuits would also help reduce case backlogs, as people often file frivolous lawsuits here. Furthermore, digitization is vital for improving efficiency. While a few benches allow e-filings, this should become the standard nationwide, along with virtual hearings, to enhance both transparency and efficiency.
To address uneven legal representation, the government must expand legal aid services, particularly in rural areas, ensuring poor litigants have access to senior lawyers without financial concerns. The government should fund these services. Additionally, the Bangladesh Bar Council must take stronger action by creating lawyer panels to guarantee no one is left unrepresented, while maintaining high ethical and professional standards. These reforms would significantly improve justice accessibility for ordinary citizens, ensuring a fairer and more efficient system.
8. Let’s take a lighter turn before we close — when you’re not immersed in constitutional debates, how do you unwind? Any books, habits, or routines that help you reset?
I truly enjoy walking—it’s one of my favorite activities. It keeps my mind fresh, and interestingly, I often find myself thinking about my cases while I walk. Many of my legal arguments and insights actually come to me during these walks! It’s my personal way to unwind and refresh my thoughts.
As for reading, I tend to gravitate towards books outside of my professional field. One of my main interests is Islamic jurisprudence. I had pursued a second bachelor’s degree in politics and international relations, which deepened my fascination with Islamic concepts of governance. I find the principles of governance in Islam particularly captivating, and I enjoy exploring how these ideas have shaped legal and political systems. These readings allow me to reset and approach my work from different angles, broadening my perspectives on law and life.
For me, these personal interests serve as a balance, helping me maintain clarity of mind while enriching my knowledge in ways that complement my professional life. They allow me to step outside of my legal work, recharge, and return to it with a more well-rounded and thoughtful approach.
9. Finally, if you could revise just one article of the Constitution to create lasting systemic impact, which one would you choose — and why?
The most impactful constitutional amendment would be establishing a collective body – like the proposed National Constitutional Council – to appoint key constitutional functionaries such as the Election Commission. This body should include both ruling and opposition representatives to prevent executive dominance.
The Constitution Reform Commission suggested this council be chaired by the President and include the Chief Justice, Speaker, Deputy Speaker, Prime Minister and Opposition Leader. Such balanced representation would ensure fairer appointments.
This reform is crucial because when constitutional posts like the Election Commission are appointed by a bipartisan body rather than unilaterally by the executive, it creates necessary checks and balances. While political parties haven’t fully embraced this proposal, its implementation would significantly improve our system’s fairness and credibility.
The key advantage is that this change would help address one of our most pressing governance issues – the politicization of constitutional appointments.
