Candidates giving EC basic data a must: SC

Dhaka, Dec 11 (bdprem.com) – The Appellate Division Tuesday quashed the appeal against the High Court order that made it mandatory for those running for the parliamentary polls to provide eight basic information to the Election Commission. The full bench of the Appellate Division led by chief justice Md Ruhul Amin delivered the ruling after hearing the appeal filed by Abu Safa. The court in the verdict said Safa filed the appeal on deception; as the law does not consider it as an appeal, the appeal is annulled. Safa was not present in the court though it ordered his lawyer on Nov 20 to produce him during Tuesday's hearing. His lawyer placed an affidavit to the court and the verdict was delivered after reviewing the affidavit. After the verdict, lawyer for the writ petitioner Dr Kamal Hossain told the reporters, "The Supreme Court ordered to produce Abu Safa before the court today. But his lawyers said he could not be traced." "The documents submitted for the appeal were artificial. This is not an appeal in the eye of the law. The appeal wasted time of the court. The Election Commission could not receive information from the candidates in the cancelled parliament elections because of the appeal." "The persons responsible (for wasting time) should be punished," Kamal said. "After this verdict nominees for the parliamentary elections will have to submit eight data," he said. On May 24, 2005 the High Court issued the verdict asking the nominees to provide information for the parliamentary elections following a public interest litigation filed by three lawyers. The Appellate Division accepted the appeal for hearing after Safa sought permission to appeal the High Court verdict. Later, Safa filed a regular appeal at the instruction of the court. The Appellate Division stayed the High Court order five days before the deadline for submission of nomination papers for the forestalled Jan 22 elections. The candidates did not need to submit information on eight issues to the commission because of the stay order. Barrister Omar Sadat represented the appeal petitioner. The eight information the HC ordered the nominees to submit included educational qualification of the candidate, if there is any board or university certificate, whether the applicant is accused in any criminal case, whether there was any criminal case earlier and its result, occupation, income sources, whether he/she was elected lawmaker before. If so, whether he/she fulfilled the demands he pledged to the constituency, description of properties of the nominee and their family members, whether the candidate has bank borrowing in his own name or in the name of his family members, the amount of that loan and other related information and if the nominee is heads any loan-defaulting company and the amount of loan defaulted.