Faizi's Case: Bar Moinul’s Power and Our Free Judiciary
By Imran Faruk
High court declared Chittagong University’s investigation on justice Faizi’s case as illegal because High Court thinks tampering of Tabulation Sheet alone is not sufficient enough to declare fraud.
Some thoughts automatically cross our mind. Bar Moinul Hossain initially represented Faizi’s case and now he is a law advisor. Is he showing his ego and influencing the judiciary?
At least one dozen of current High Court judges were nominated by recent past BNP-Jamat government. The nominations included BNP-Jamat lawyers and party cadres. It is easy for Bar Moinul to influence them.
Interestingly, High Court didn’t summon any of the Chittagong University Investigation Committee members to provide their opinion on how the investigation was done and how the conclusion was drawn.
What other proofs High Court needed? The person who received payment to tamper Faizi and others’ mark sheets gave a confession to the Chittagong University Investigation Committee but High Court didn’t bother to summon him.
If a medical committee investigates a patient’s file and symptoms 17 years after the patient died and come to a conclusion of the cause of death, would High Court term it illegal? Based on archeological investigation after thousands of years, scientists are concluding about the diseases that old Egyptian Kings suffered from. But our High Court thinks an investigation after 17 years is insufficient.
Incidentally, fictitious extortion cases against Sk. Hasina filed after 8 years are very attractive to our judges and they do not think it baseless for insufficient evidence.