Five of the High Court-appointed six amici curiae opined that the writ petition, filed by a lawyer seeking court directives to ban broadcasting of Qatar-based television channel Al-Jazeera in Bangladesh, is not maintainable.
The lawyers are: AJ Mohammad Ali, Fida M Kamal, Kamal Ul Alam, Probir Neogi and Shahdeen Malik.
They said the petitioner has to show that he has been aggrieved by the government action or inaction taken over the issue. He also has to show that the executive is failing to perform its duty required by the law, they added.
But the writ petitioner didn't submit sufficient evidence for the court's satisfaction to admit it and the petitioner could not show how he has been aggrieved.
But other amicus curiae Abdul Matin Khasru said the petitioner has grounds to be aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent and he has constitutional right to enjoy the protection of law over the issue and accordingly, he can file such petition.
Advocate AJ Mohammad Ali said broadcasting of Al-Jazeera should not be banned in Bangladesh. "Our constitution has guaranteed the right of every citizen to freedom of speech and expression and freedom of press," he added.
Advocate Kamal Ul Alam said the writ petitioner didn't have any grounds to file the petition as he has no justification to be aggrieved over the issue.
Advocate Fida M Kamal said, "The government has not taken any decision with regard to stopping broadcasting of the channel or I don't know whether the government has taken such decision in this regard. If the petitioner wants to say that there is a failure in the part of the executive to safeguard the public interest, he will have to address minimum a letter of demand of justice. But he has not done it."
"He will have to make a request that the executive have failed in their duty. If the petitioner had made a request to DC or the digital security authority or the inspector general of police that you make a request to BTRC to stop it immediately in the public interest and if this public interest is being neglected or overlooked, only then he can approach to the court," the lawyer added.
Advocate Probir Neogi said, "If the question comes over whether the High Court may pass directives to ban broadcasting of Al-Jazeera in the country and remove the contents of the report from all social media, including Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, my answer would be negative."
Advocate Abdul Matin Khasru said, "It is apparent that the petitioner is personally aggrieved for the failure of the respondents. It is important for the court to understand that the relevance and importance of Articles 31 and 44 of the Constitution has empowered the petitioner to enjoy the protection of law and ensure fundamental rights."
bikashju@gmail.com