Provisions for and against the
rule of law in the Constitution of Bangladesh
Rule of law means, the absolute supremacy
or predominance of the regular law as opposed to the influence of arbitrary
power, and excludes the existence of arbitrariness. The general conception of
the rule of law has become crystallized with professor Dicey’s usage of that
phrase in his work ‘the law of the Constitution’ first published in 1885. He first
stated that the rule of law was one of the essential features of the
Constitution. The rule of law is the legal principle that law should govern a
nation, as opposed to being governed by arbitrary decisions of individual
government officials. This principle of rule of law has three general
principles, to establish rule of law in a country government should execute
following principles:
1.
Absence
of arbitrary power, because rule of law requires supremacy of Constitution and
others Ordinary laws before the influence of arbitrary power of executive
authorities.
2.
Equality before law to the all classes of
people. No man is above the law, and the officials are like private citizens
under duty to obey the same law. There can be no special court or tribunal for
the state officials.
3.
Constitution
is the result of the Ordinary law of land.
Accordingly, Bangladesh recognises rule
of law as a basic feature of its Constitution. In Anwar Hussain
Chowdhury v Bangladesh 1989 BLD, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh recognised
the rule of law as one of the basic features of the Constitution. In
spite of this, there have been many contradictory provisions in the
Constitution that go against rule of law. We aim to identify the relevant
provisions of the Constitution ensuring rule of law and then we will attempt to
analyse the contradictory provisions of the Constitution that go against the
concept of rule of law.
