Zia Orphanage Trust In the verdict of the corruption case, the judicial court sentenced BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia to five years imprisonment, the biggest question that has come up in the political arena is that Khaleda Zia can take part in the 11th parliamentary elections? Directly 'yes' or 'no' do not appear in the answer to the recent law, constitution and some fresh judgments and observations of the High Court in recent years. The essence of which is the fact - the matter is really unclear.
Khaleda Zia has been sentenced only 9-10 months before the 11th parliamentary elections, and the general speculation is that the prison chief can choose the chief of the prison? There is no end to curiosity in public. In relation to the law and the constitution, the concerned people say, if the High Court postponed or canceled the sentence of Khaleda Zia, she could choose. If the High Court does not postpone the trial and he is released on bail, he will not be able to participate in the election. If the High Court postponed or canceled the court again and if the Appellate Division stayed the order of the High Court and stayed the verdict of the judicial court, then Khaleda Zia could not participate in the election. These are the interpretations of the law and the outline of the constitution. But beyond this, there are some examples of law and constitution as well as in front of the court when the lawyers of the angry Khaleda Zia will go to the High Court, they will also bring some examples.
On the question of qualification and disqualification for Khaleda's participation in the upcoming elections, Khaleda Zia said on Thursday, "There are two verdicts in this case. A verdict says that unless the appeal goes to the final stage, it can be said that the other verdict is not possible. Now, what is the decision of the Appellate Division and the Independent Election Commission to decide on his (Khaleda Zia)? "In the verdict of the Appellate Division in 1996, Justice Mustafa Kamal said that the question of such disqualification should be corrected after the vote, in the election tribunal. Returning Officer cancellation of nomination, but no writ will be issued. The High Court gave another verdict. The High Court said in the verdict that anyone in the judicial court will be disqualified from the election. The appeal court does not have the power to suspend the matter of being convicted (bar).
Article 66 (2C) of the Constitution regarding the qualifications and inadequacy of participation in the parliamentary elections has said that no person will be eligible for election if convicted for moral decimation and five years after the release of the prison sentence for a minimum two years.
Khaleda Zia case constitutional expert Dr. Shahedin Malik told Ittefaq, 'Whether anyone can choose if the lower court is to be tried, the matter is not clear in our law. Khaleda Zia's sentence in the lower court, now she will appeal to the High Court, it is normal. If the High Court does not suspend the judgment of the lower court, and if the appeal is pending, he can also choose from the usual account of the law-from prison. And if the High Court dismisses its appeal, then another. Apart from this, the verdict of the high court verdict has been vague. As the Disaster Management and Relief Minister Mofazzal Hossain Chowdhury Maya were sentenced, the High Court dismissed his appeal, then the Appellate Division dismissed the High Court order and ordered fresh hearings. This means that the case is still pending in the High Court. But it is not the Ministry of Myan or Minister of Parliament. At the time of appeals, he remained the member of parliament. So here the Minister Mayan has been an example. For this example, it can be said that if there is an appeal in the High Court, no one will be ineligible for the elections. '
Shahid Malik said, "Being a member of the 9th Parliament and who is also a member of the current Parliament. The verdict of Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir's case and its incident is also an example in front of us. Cox's Bazar-4 MP (Awami League) Abdur Rahman Badi has been sentenced to three years. The appeal is ongoing, the fact is that he also remained in the post of MP. Therefore, no person will be allowed to be selected in the lower court - it is not considered final. "
The special constitutional expert said, "There is a discussion of the qualification of the contest and the inadequacy of the 66th paragraph of the constitution, 'to remain'. Now it is a matter of example that the example of the MP-ministers of the government party is in front of everyone, it is normal for Khaleda Zia to have that opportunity as usual. But still, the word goes out. '
According to the lawmakers, the review of the law and the constitution - no one can be considered guilty under the law until the final sentence is fined. The only jurisdiction of the Supreme Court's Appellate Division to finalize the punishment in our country. Deputies of the lower court or the High Court have not been dismissed in the past nor the incompetence of elections has not been created. The sentence of the person remained in force till the appeal of the High Court against Dallas. But if the appeal is accepted, it is not called a person who is sentenced. He is considered as a person in judges.
Some of the law and constitutional experts say that after the independence of the country, no example of ineligibility in the parliamentary election of the jailed parliament was not created. There is no precedent even in the post. Rather, many people, including Ershad, have been able to take part in the elections and have also been elected as MPs.
Disaster Management and Relief Minister Mofazzal Hossain Chowdhury Maya has given 13 years of lower court
Khaleda Zia has been sentenced only 9-10 months before the 11th parliamentary elections, and the general speculation is that the prison chief can choose the chief of the prison? There is no end to curiosity in public. In relation to the law and the constitution, the concerned people say, if the High Court postponed or canceled the sentence of Khaleda Zia, she could choose. If the High Court does not postpone the trial and he is released on bail, he will not be able to participate in the election. If the High Court postponed or canceled the court again and if the Appellate Division stayed the order of the High Court and stayed the verdict of the judicial court, then Khaleda Zia could not participate in the election. These are the interpretations of the law and the outline of the constitution. But beyond this, there are some examples of law and constitution as well as in front of the court when the lawyers of the angry Khaleda Zia will go to the High Court, they will also bring some examples.
On the question of qualification and disqualification for Khaleda's participation in the upcoming elections, Khaleda Zia said on Thursday, "There are two verdicts in this case. A verdict says that unless the appeal goes to the final stage, it can be said that the other verdict is not possible. Now, what is the decision of the Appellate Division and the Independent Election Commission to decide on his (Khaleda Zia)? "In the verdict of the Appellate Division in 1996, Justice Mustafa Kamal said that the question of such disqualification should be corrected after the vote, in the election tribunal. Returning Officer cancellation of nomination, but no writ will be issued. The High Court gave another verdict. The High Court said in the verdict that anyone in the judicial court will be disqualified from the election. The appeal court does not have the power to suspend the matter of being convicted (bar).
Article 66 (2C) of the Constitution regarding the qualifications and inadequacy of participation in the parliamentary elections has said that no person will be eligible for election if convicted for moral decimation and five years after the release of the prison sentence for a minimum two years.
Khaleda Zia case constitutional expert Dr. Shahedin Malik told Ittefaq, 'Whether anyone can choose if the lower court is to be tried, the matter is not clear in our law. Khaleda Zia's sentence in the lower court, now she will appeal to the High Court, it is normal. If the High Court does not suspend the judgment of the lower court, and if the appeal is pending, he can also choose from the usual account of the law-from prison. And if the High Court dismisses its appeal, then another. Apart from this, the verdict of the high court verdict has been vague. As the Disaster Management and Relief Minister Mofazzal Hossain Chowdhury Maya were sentenced, the High Court dismissed his appeal, then the Appellate Division dismissed the High Court order and ordered fresh hearings. This means that the case is still pending in the High Court. But it is not the Ministry of Myan or Minister of Parliament. At the time of appeals, he remained the member of parliament. So here the Minister Mayan has been an example. For this example, it can be said that if there is an appeal in the High Court, no one will be ineligible for the elections. '
Shahid Malik said, "Being a member of the 9th Parliament and who is also a member of the current Parliament. The verdict of Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir's case and its incident is also an example in front of us. Cox's Bazar-4 MP (Awami League) Abdur Rahman Badi has been sentenced to three years. The appeal is ongoing, the fact is that he also remained in the post of MP. Therefore, no person will be allowed to be selected in the lower court - it is not considered final. "
The special constitutional expert said, "There is a discussion of the qualification of the contest and the inadequacy of the 66th paragraph of the constitution, 'to remain'. Now it is a matter of example that the example of the MP-ministers of the government party is in front of everyone, it is normal for Khaleda Zia to have that opportunity as usual. But still, the word goes out. '
According to the lawmakers, the review of the law and the constitution - no one can be considered guilty under the law until the final sentence is fined. The only jurisdiction of the Supreme Court's Appellate Division to finalize the punishment in our country. Deputies of the lower court or the High Court have not been dismissed in the past nor the incompetence of elections has not been created. The sentence of the person remained in force till the appeal of the High Court against Dallas. But if the appeal is accepted, it is not called a person who is sentenced. He is considered as a person in judges.
Some of the law and constitutional experts say that after the independence of the country, no example of ineligibility in the parliamentary election of the jailed parliament was not created. There is no precedent even in the post. Rather, many people, including Ershad, have been able to take part in the elections and have also been elected as MPs.
Disaster Management and Relief Minister Mofazzal Hossain Chowdhury Maya has given 13 years of lower court
Hello, my name is Jack Sparrow. I'm a 50 year old self-employed Pirate from the Caribbean.
No comments:
Post a Comment