Dhaka: The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court has permitted a plea by Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, contesting the High Court verdict that declared the party’s registration illegal. A four-member Appellate Division bench, led by Chief Justice Syed Refaat Ahmed, delivered the judgment, stating, “The Civil Appeal No 139 of 2013 is allowed and Civil Petition No 3112 of 2013 is disposed of in the light of the judgment delivered in Civil Appeal.”
According to Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha, the apex court instructed the Election Commission (EC) to resolve pending issues concerning Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, including its registration. Barrister Ehsan A Siddiq and Advocate Mohammad Shishir Manir represented Jamaat, while Advocate Touhidul Islam argued on behalf of the Election Commission.
Advocate Mohammad Shishir Manir remarked, “A legal battle which had been going on for more than a decade came to a successful end. Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami today, through the judgment of the apex court, got back its registration.” He expressed optimism about receiving the short order soon and approaching the EC to regain the party’s registration and symbol.
The Jamaat counsel alleged that the party’s registration was revoked through a politically motivated Public Interest Litigation (PIL). He emphasized that the judgment ensures multiparty democracy and a participatory parliament. He hoped for a vibrant parliament in Bangladesh, facilitating constructive debates and strengthening democracy.
The apex court directed the EC to address Jamaat’s registration matter and any other related issues. The Appellate Division had set June 1 for the judgment on Jamaat’s plea after restoring the party’s appeal against the High Court verdict on October 22, 2024.
The High Court had declared Jamaat’s registration illegal on August 1, 2013, with a three-member bench ruling that the registration granted to the party by the EC was beyond lawful authority. Subsequently, the EC issued a gazette on December 7, 2018, canceling the party’s registration. Jamaat later appealed against the High Court decision, but the Appellate Division initially dismissed the appeal due to the absence of the party’s main counsel.