Chief Justice orders to take action against those involved in throwing eggs at judge

The Chief Justice Dr Syed Refaat Ahmed has instructed strict actions against those involved in the incident where eggs were thrown at High Court Division Judge Md Ashraful Kamal in the courtroom.

To this end, the Supreme Court administration has started reviewing CCTV footage from inside the courtroom and its entrance.

The directive was communicated to the Attorney General and the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association on Thursday following a meeting with the Chief Justice.

After the meeting, Barrister Mahbub Uddin Khokon, President of the Supreme Court Lawyers' Association, told reporters that the Chief Justice had expressed his firm stance on the matter.

He said that the act of throwing an egg in the courtroom had tarnished the image of the entire judiciary.

He emphasized that such actions would not be tolerated under any circumstances. If there are any allegations against a judge, there is a provision to file a complaint with the Supreme Judicial Council, but taking the law into one's own hands will not be accepted. The involved individuals will be identified through the CCTV footage. The Supreme Court's Registrar General’s office has initiated an inquiry into the incident.

The Supreme Court Lawyers' Association will also form an investigation committee regarding the egg-throwing incident, as stated by Mahbub Uddin Khokon.

He further mentioned that if any lawyer is found involved, their membership in the Lawyers' Association and their Bar Council certification may be revoked. He expressed agreement with the Chief Justice’s strict position on the matter.

Chief Justice Syed Refaat Ahmed has also expressed his deep concern over the incident.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court said in a press statement that the chief justice expressed his deep concern about the unprecedented and untoward incident that occurred on Wednesday at the Supreme Court premises.

The Bangladesh Supreme Court has been observing the overall situation to ensure the courts in the country can provide justice to the people without interruption, the statement said.

The egg-throwing incident occurred on Wednesday as a bench led by Justice Md Ashraful Kamal was hearing a case.

During the heated confrontation, one lawyer threw an egg at Justice Kamal. The egg hit the desk in front of his seat.

Meanwhile, some lawyers began creating a commotion.

Following this, both Justice Kamal and Justice Islam left the courtroom and retreated to their chambers.

In the 2016 verdict, Justice Kamal remarked about Ziaur Rahman’s actions, saying: "Major General Ziaur Rahman seized the presidency through coercion, violating his oath as a public servant. He failed to protect the elected president and the nation’s four leaders. Zia joined hands with the killers of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and the four leaders, unlawfully and unconstitutionally usurping the presidency at gunpoint. Such actions can be described as nothing less than hijacking a public institution with the barrel of a gun.”

The verdict also compared Zia's actions to those of a bandit leader: "Bandits often operate in groups, with a leader orchestrating the robbery. Similarly, Zia, along with others, dissolved the elected parliament using unconstitutional means, usurping the people’s power through force, akin to a band of robbers."

Justice Kamal also criticized Zia for enacting the Indemnity Ordinance, which shielded the killers of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his family, saying: "By legalizing the murders, Zia proved himself to be complicit in the killings. Despite being a freedom fighter, he rehabilitated anti-liberation forces like Razakars, Al-Badr, and Jamaat-e-Islami, granting them citizenship and political legitimacy. He even gave war criminals parliamentary and ministerial positions, betraying the blood of three million martyrs and the honour of two hundred thousand women."

The judgment further condemned Zia’s actions: "Zia not only supported the killers of the Father of the Nation and the four national leaders but also rewarded them with roles like ambassadors and parliamentarians. Worse, he blocked the trial of these killings by enacting the Indemnity Ordinance, showing that he was a direct accomplice."