The recent ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States striking down former President Donald Trump’s global tariff policy serves as a powerful reminder of the judiciary’s role in safeguarding democracy. In a 6–3 verdict led by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court held that the President had exceeded his authority by imposing sweeping tariffs without clear congressional approval.
The judgment reinforces a fundamental democratic principle: an electoral mandate does not grant unlimited executive power. Leaders must act within constitutional boundaries, and it is the judiciary’s duty to enforce those limits when necessary.
Democratic systems worldwide rely on independent courts to prevent overreach. The Supreme Court of India, for example, has intervened in cases involving unlawful surveillance and property demolitions, affirming that national security cannot automatically override constitutional rights and due process.
In Bangladesh, however, judicial independence has long faced challenges. During the extended tenure of the Bangladesh Awami League, critics alleged that the judiciary was used to legitimize executive actions. Following the mass uprising of 2024, many hoped the courts would reassert themselves as guardians of fundamental rights. Instead, concerns over intimidation, case manipulation, and controversial legal actions persisted during the interim government period.
Reports of mass cases, freezing of bank accounts, asset seizures, and reputational damage through media trials raised serious questions about due process. In such an atmosphere, public trust in the judiciary inevitably weakens.
Now, under the leadership of Tarique Rahman, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party has pledged reforms through its 31-point agenda. The ninth point emphasizes ensuring judicial independence in line with the Constitution and the landmark Masdar Hossain case verdict. Proposed measures include forming a Judicial Commission, strengthening the Supreme Court’s administrative authority, restoring accountability mechanisms, and ensuring merit-based judicial appointments.
The immediate priority should be the formation of a neutral judicial inquiry commission to investigate allegations of interference and misuse of the legal system. Such a commission should review controversial cases filed during the interim period, examine asset freezes and property seizures, and recommend remedies where injustice is proven.
A credible and transparent inquiry would not only reduce politically motivated litigation but also restore confidence among citizens, businesses, and investors. It would reinforce constitutional balance among the legislature, executive, and judiciary — and help Bangladesh move toward a stronger culture of accountability and the rule of law.
Audite Karim is an author and playwright. Email: [email protected]
Bd-pratidin English/ Jisan
