Public Law & Institutions · Bangladesh · Historical legislation
The 2025 judicial appointment Ordinance did more than establish a Council. It set out factors for selection and separate routes for recommendations to the High Court Division, for additional judges and to the Appellate Division. This is a historical reading of those stated mechanics.
A supplementary set of selection factors
Section 6 stated that, in addition to constitutional qualifications, the Council would consider specified matters when recommending Supreme Court judges and additional judges. The list included an age that could not be below 45; educational qualifications; professional competence; experience; publications and training; specialist legal knowledge; overall knowledge and wisdom; integrity; reputation; respect for law; information on criminal conviction; and other matters determined by the Council. The provision sets out the 2025 text’s stated factors; it should not be assumed to describe a current selection test.
Different routes for different appointments
The Ordinance distinguished three appointment settings. For an additional High Court Division judge, the text described gathering information, inviting applications through public notice, scrutiny, shortlisting and interviews before a recommendation. For a High Court Division judge, it referred to matters including the number of cases disposed of by an additional judge, quality of judicial orders and decisions, court management, competence, integrity and reputation. For the Appellate Division, it referred to seniority among High Court Division judges and related measures including case disposal, quality, court management, competence, integrity and reputation.
Advice and a stated review step
Under sections 10 and 11, the Chief Justice would transmit the Council’s recommendation as advice to the President. The text provided a 15-day period for appointment or arrangements to implement the advice, and allowed the President to return a matter for review with relevant information and reasons in the circumstances stated. The Council could then revise its recommendation or maintain the earlier one with information and reasons. These were textual features of the 2025 instrument, not a substitute for checking the governing law today.
The importance of the repeal notice
The official record declares the Ordinance repealed by the Supreme Court Judges Appointment (Repeal) Act, 2026, Act No. 48 of 2026. The repeal notice does not tell a reader whether the later legislation adopted, changed or omitted any given 2025 factor. That is why historical source analysis and current legal analysis must remain separate exercises.
How to use a historical instrument responsibly
First fix the relevant date and issue. Next identify the exact provision and version of the source being cited. Finally keep the historical text separate from the current legal framework, including any current legislation, rules, notifications or other materials that may govern a live matter. The 2025 instrument can be useful evidence of a historic legislative position; it is not a substitute for a current-law review.
TRW & Co works across regulatory, disputes and institutional matters. Explore our practice areas, read further Perspectives, or contact the firm for advice on a particular matter.
Frequently asked questions
Did the 2025 text state a minimum age?
Yes. Section 6 listed an age that could not be below 45 among the matters to be considered. Read the official record
Did the Ordinance use the same process for all judicial appointments?
No. It set out distinct provisions for additional High Court judges, High Court judges and Appellate Division judges. Read the official record
Can the 2025 criteria be relied on as current selection rules?
No. The official record lists the Ordinance as repealed in 2026. Any current inquiry needs the law in force at the relevant time. Read the official record
Primary materials
The provisions discussed in this insight are drawn from the official Legislative and Parliamentary Affairs Division record. Readers should use the primary source and current authoritative materials for any present-day legal question.
This publication is general legal information. It is not legal advice and should not be relied upon without advice tailored to the facts, jurisdiction and time period concerned.