Due Process Fallacy under Crossfire Populism: How to Save the Courts?
SCLS Law Review Vol. 3. No.2 [May 2020], ISSN (Online): 2523-9236, ISSN (Print): 2523-9228
9 Pages Posted: 25 Jun 2020
Date Written: May 31, 2020
When a state is formed as a republic, it is expected that all the power is held by the people, the lawmakers are elected freely and the state is always ruled by none else but only law. Nevertheless, concerns continuously strike in the case of Bangladesh as there has been sneaking popularity of extra-judicial execution. The promise of due process is stolen, and the judicial process is dodged randomly at will. This crossfire populism has challenged the fundamental promise and premise of ‘rule of law’ on which the state was formed. The executive branch of the state tends to fuse with the legislative branch in such a sophisticated way that sometimes it is difficult to distinguish the two. Adding to it now, this inclination towards execution without bothering judicial proceedings challenges the existence of the adjudicative branch of the state as well. Separation of power, systematized to uphold the rule of law, is threatened to be diminished. Power is dripping slowly into the control of one dominating body. Such regression into an unchecked and imbalanced power setup may cause the state to lose its fundamental character as a ‘Republic’. The existence of the ‘courts’, therefore, cannot be allowed to get blurred further. Under the intense inflation of crossfire populism, to preserve the constitutional oath of rule of law, ‘how to save the courts?’ is the question this paper raises and looks for an answer to.
Keywords: Rule of Law, Separation of Power, Due Process of Law, Extra-judicial Murder, Crossfire
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation