Today marks the 37th anniversary of a significant legal decision as the High Court reaffirmed Islam`s status as the state religion, dismissing a writ petition challenging its inclusion in the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. Led by Justice Naima Haider, a three-judge bench ruled that Islam`s recognition as the state religion is not contradictory to the constitution and doesn`t undermine its basic structure.
In a comprehensive 52-page verdict released to the media, the bench clarified that Islam`s designation as the state religion does not impose political obligations on the state, nor does it infringe upon the rights of individuals of other faiths. Justice Haider emphasized that the inclusion of Islam as the state religion aligns with constitutional principles and doesn`t render any part of the constitution redundant.
The verdict, supported by Justices Kazi Reza-ul Haque and Md. Ashraful Kamal, emphasized the constitutionality of recognizing Islam as the state religion. While dissenting views were noted, the majority opinion highlighted the absence of constitutional or public demand for the amendment.
Justice Ashraful Kamal, in a separate observation, criticized the Eighth Amendment, suggesting it served to legitimize military rule rather than address genuine concerns of the people. He questioned the necessity of declaring Islam as the state religion during a time when the country faced no religious or constitutional crisis.
The legal battle challenging Islam`s status as the state religion began in 2011 when a group, including prominent figures such as Former Chief Justice Kamaluddin Hossain and Poet Sufia Kamal, filed a writ petition. Despite years of legal deliberation and the involvement of senior lawyers as court assistants, the petition was ultimately dismissed on March 28, 2016, with the court citing the petitioner`s lack of legal standing.
The Eighth Amendment, introduced in 1988 by then-President Hussain Muhammad Ershad, added Islam as the state religion to the Constitution. Despite ongoing debates, today`s verdict reinforces the constitutional validity of this provision, marking a pivotal moment in the country`s legal history.
