JUDICIARY IS "SHAKING BADLY" OVER DISSATISFACTION

C O N F I D E N T I A L DHAKA 004700 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/24/2010 TAGS: BG PGOV PREL PTER SUBJECT: JUDICIARY IS "SHAKING BADLY" OVER DISSATISFACTION WITH CHIEF JUSTICE Classified By: AMBASSADOR PATRICIA BUTENIS, REASONS PARA 1.4D ¶1. (C) Summary: Ambassador's dinner for four of Bangladesh's most respected legal figures indicated that a "catastrophe" was looming in the judiciary which the former Chief Justice described as "shaking badly" due to the Chief Justice's inability to deal with government interference. End Summary. ¶2. (C) On July 17, Ambassador hosted a three-hour dinner for former Chief Justice Mustafa Kamal, Advocate Dr. Kamal Hossain, former Attorney General Hassan Ariff, and High Court Justice Taznul Islam. RLA was also present. ¶3. (C) The common theme of the guests was the deterioration of the courts' integrity and people's confidence in the judiciary which has traditionally been a pillar of decency and fairness and has played a crucial balancing role in the country's history. Justice Islam, the equivalent of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice, stated he felt helpless on a bench of unqualified and politicized judges "when our country is at such a critical point." When former Chief Justice Mustafa Kamal, one of the country's most respected figures for his wisdom and toughness, was asked by RLA if the judiciary was crumbling, he replied, "It is not crumbling but shaking badly." The other guests urged the former Chief Justice to discuss the pending "catastrophe" with the current Chief Justice, who is perceived as a decent man but short of a legal mind and backbone. ¶4. (C) None of the guests would describe the specific nature of the "catastrophe," a word used several times. As RLA learned the next day, 50 of 79 judges of the High Court (a combination of our Appeals and Supreme Courts) were planning to call on the Chief Justice to express their dissatisfaction with his administration. The two main issues were the Chief Justice's pending confirmation of 19 judicial nominees, the majority of whom did not have the requisite qualifications to serve as judges. The second issue was the Chief Justice's unsavory practice of reassigning cases to a single bench with a pro-government judge when a panel of judges disagreed on whether the government made their case. While a meeting may sound like a gentle rebuke, Dr. Kamal Hossain, Justice Islam and a lawyer with the Attorney General's office all agreed in separate conversations that the effect would be devastating. At the dinner, Mustafa Kamal agreed to talk to his successor. ¶5. (C) RLA learned the next day from Justice Islam that the catastrophe was averted that very afternoon. He said the Chief Justice must have suspected something was up because he called together the nine most senior judges and "apologized" for his reassignment of cases to a single bench. According to Justice Islam, the former Chief Justice did not intervene. Justice Islam found the timing of this meeting curious and surprising. Subsequent conversations with another dinner guest and serveral members of the bar indicated that trouble was brewing on the bench but no one appeared to know about the meeting with the nine judges. 6.(C) Comment: The Chief Justice's mea culpa was timely but not much more than a band aid in restoring faith in the judiciary's independence. BUTENIS