ABSTRACT:

Public interest litigation (PIL) has a vital role in the civil justice system in that it could achieve those
objectives which could hardly be achieved through conventional private litigation. PIL, for instance,
offers a ladder to justice to disadvantaged sections of society, provides an avenue to enforce diffused or
collective rights, and enables civil society to not only spread awareness about human rights but also
allows them to participate in government decision making. PIL could also contribute to good governance
by keeping the government accountable.

An attempt has been made in this paper to show the role of ‘Public Interest Litigation’ in the context of
Bangladesh with reference to basic structure and due process of PIL. The initiation and continuance of
litigation has been the prerogative of the injured person or the aggrieved party. The Supreme Court of
Bangladesh has given all individuals in the country and the newly formed consumer groups or social
action groups, an easier access to the law and introduced in their work a broad public interest
perspective.

INTRODUCTION:

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) as it has developed in recent years marks a significant departure from
traditional judicial proceedings. PIL was not a sudden phenomenon. It was an idea that was in the
making for some time before its vigorous growth in the early eighties. It now dominates the public
perception of the Supreme Court. The court is now seen as an institution not only reaching out to
provide relief to citizens but even venturing into formulating policy which the state must follow.

At the time of Independence, the bulk of citizens were unaware of their legal rights and much less in a
position to assert them. The guarantees of fundamental rights and the assurances of directive principles,
described as the ‘conscious of the Constitution’ would have remained empty promises for the majority
of illiterate and indigent citizens under adversarial proceedings. PIL has been a conscious attempt to
transform the promise into reality.

Methodology:

This paper is prepared based on a review of secondary information from relevant books, journals,
articles and newspapers. The primary objective of this paper is to pinpoint the conceptual overview of
Public Interest Litigation and the critical factors of its application. This paper also highlights the various
features, factors and limitations of Public Interest Litigation in practice.

The term “PIL” originated:

In the United Stated in the mid-1980s. Since the nineteenth century, various movements in that country
had contributed to public interest law, which was part of the legal aid movement. The first legal aid
office was established in New York in 1876. In the 1960s the PIL movement began to receive financial
support from the office of Economic Opportunity, this encouraged lawyers and public-spirited persons
to take up cases of the under –privileged and fight against dangers to environment and public health
and exploitation of consumers and the weaker sections. However, it was not easy to convince the judges
giving relief through PIL, as it was a new phenomenon in our legal system. But, the legal and social
activists were relentless in their efforts and finally enabled the progressive minded judges to interpret
the Constitution in line with the public intent.

PIL: Meaning & Definition:

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) “INJUSTICE ANYWHERE IS A THREAT TO JUSTICE ANYWHERE”,

MARTIN LUTHER KING, Jr.

WHAT IS PUBLIC?

Public means an individual, body of individuals or the masses in general.

WHAT IS LITIGATION?

Court case, law suit or legal action etc.

WHAT IS PIL?

Public Interest Litigation means a legal action initiated in a court of law regarding a matter which relates
to or is connected with the interest of the public.

According to Black's Law Dictionary- "Public Interest Litigation means a legal action initiated in a court of
law for the enforcement of public interest or general interest in which the public or class of the
community have pecuniary interest or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are
affected."

Public interest law encompasses numerous topics, such as constitutional law, criminal law, family law,
legal ethics, education, the environment, and civil rights. Public interest litigation seeks to advocate for
fairness for the average or less represented citizens of the population. Public interest groups attempt to
serve as a watchdog against fraud and other abuses in government and the corporate world. Public
interest law seeks to uncover threats to public health and well-being and fight to end them, and
encourages a fair, sustainable economy, and fosters responsive, democratic government.

Typical goals include to:

 protect people and the environment;

 hold accountable those who abuse power;
 challenge governmental, corporate and individual wrongdoing;
 increase access to the courts; combat threats to our justice system.

PIL aims to change the situation of marginalized people for the better, not only for the
individuals who are party to the litigation, but all similarly situated. The ultimate goal is social
transformation -to alter structured inequalities and power relations in society in ways that reduce the
weight of morally irrelevant circumstances, such as socio-economic status/class, gender, race , religion
or sexual orientation.

Who can file a PIL?

The PIL can be filed by a third party if the constitutional rights of an individual or group of individuals are
violated. In such case the individual or groups of individuals is not able to movecourt personally for
justice because of poverty, helplessness, lack of awareness or socially andeconomically disadvantaged
conditions.

A PIL can be filed when the following conditions are fulfilled:

 There must be a public injury and public wrong caused by the wrongful act or omissionof the
state or public authority.
  It is for the enforcement of basic human rights of weaker sections of the community who are
downtrodden, ignorant and whose fundamental and constitutional rights have been infringed.

- It must not be frivolous litigation by persons having vested interests.

Features of PIL

 In PIL the scope of the law suit is consciously shaped by the court and parties, rather thanbeing
limited by a specific past event.

 The fact inquiry resembles the kind of inquiry taken into current problems by legislativebodies,
rather than a simple investigation of past historical events.

 The judgment does not end the court's involvement but requires a continuingadministrative
judicial role

 The judge plays an active role in organizing and shaping the litigation and is not passive.

 The subject matter of the law suit is a 'grievances, about public policy and is not a private suit.

Manner of taking cognizance: Letters and Telegrams, Suo Moto

WHO IS ENTITLED TO FILE PIL?

 The right of a person to file a suit or conduct a litigation in a court of law is known as 'Locus
Standi'.
  However, a person is not entitled to file PIL, if he/she lacks sufficient public interest, acts for self
gain or personal profit, involves in political activities or has malafied intention.

Procedure in High Court:

A PIL is filed in a High court, and then two copies of the petition have to be filed. Also, an advance copy
of the petition has to be served on the each respondent, i.e. opposite party, and this proof of service has
to be affixed on the petition. In Supreme Court: If a PIL is filed in the Supreme Court, then (four + one)
(i.e. five) sets of petition have to be filed. The opposite party is served the copy only when notice is
issued

Court Fee: A Court fee of taka 100. So, per Respondent (i.e. for each number of opposite party, court
fees of taka. So) has to be affixed on the petition.

Steps Involved:

Proceedings, in the PIL commence and carry on in the same manner, as other cases.

However, in between the proceedings if the judge feels he may appoint a commissioner, to inspect
allegations like pollution being caused, trees being cut, sewer problems, etc. After filing of replies, by
opposite party, and rejoinder by the petitioner, final hearing takes place, and the judge gives his final
decision.

TYPES:

Representative Social Action this is a form of PIL whereby any member of the public can seek judicial
redresal for a legal wrong caused to a person or a determinate class of persons who by reason of
poverty, or socially and economically disadvantaged position, is unable to approach the court. Citizen
Social Action the cases under this category represent a shift from the traditional view of the courts being
a forum to enforce individual rights.

A PIL can be filed when the following conditions are fulfilled,

There must be a public injury and public wrong caused by the wrongful act or mission of the state or
public authority. It is for the enforcement of basic human rights of weaker sections of the community
who are downtrodden, ignorant and whose fundamental and constitutional rights have been infringed.
– It must not be frivolous litigation by persons having vested interests.

HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATIONS IN PIL:

The problems of violations of human rights had been brought to the notice of the apex court and also
different High Court by the way of PIL and they are vigilant in granting appropriate reliefs and giving
suitable directions.

THE UNDERNOTED ARE JUSTICIABLE:

 Fundamental Rights
 Right From Slavery
 Freedom of Residence
 Freedom of Press
 Right to Human Dignity
 Right to Work
 Right Against Torture
 Right to Privacy
 Right of Affirmative Remedy to Enforce Rights
 Rights to Family etc

Historical Background and Development of PIL:

A scrutiny of PIL in various jurisdictions demonstrates a very interesting pattern. PIL first emerges as a
result of expressions of social commitment of conscious individuals. Then it faces an initial period of
recognition problem. Eventually, it breaks down the traditional constrains. Once successful, it is treated
as a major development and becomes a permanent feature of the legal system. Finally, this success in its
part inspires other jurisdictions to follow the same route. PIL thus travels from one jurisdiction to
another.
However, development of PIL is closely dependent on the constitutional culture and historical
experience of the people. Therefore, its history in each jurisdiction is unique. The term PIL, as it is now
known, and the associated term ‘public interest law, were first coined in the United States. While
arrogant capitalism and excessive individualism often typifies the American society, there is also a
strong tranquil current of collectivism and social mindedness. This concern for the society has brought
many changes during this century. In the legal field, it has brought new techniques, mechanisms,
approaches and procedures in favour of the collective interest. Public interest law includes a number of
these developments including legal aid, research, formation of public opinion, lobbying and litigation
conducted by specialized lawyers and organizations. PIL, litigation in the interest of the public, is thus
only one of the various methods of the greater movement of public interest law.

There are a number of movements that may be identified as the roots of public interest law and have
shaped its ‘patterns of organization, modes of financing and choices of strategies’

The first major root of public interest law may be traced to the legal aid movement that started during
the 1870s. Legal aid movement brought two new features to the established system. One is that pro
bono work became institutionalized. The other is that it reflected not an individual lawyer’s concern but
the concern of the community that was often subsidized by a third party benefactor. By the first half of
the century, legal aid became a regular and established feature. Public interest lawyers borrowed the
organizational form of legal aid firms. On the one hand, there was commitment and enthusiasm to serve
the people. On the other hand, they were professionals with independent offices, salaried staff and full
time devotion.

The second root of public interest law lies in the works of the Progressive Era Reformers. At the turn of
the twentieth century, during the time of rapid industrialization and social and political changes, a
movement aimed to check the evils of unregulated business enterprises achieved remarkable success.
New legislation aimed to protect the workers and consumers and monitoring institutions like the
Federal Trade Commission came up to defend collective rights.

Progressive Era Reform helped to advance the philosophical basis of public interest law as it proceeded
with the assumption that the Government should intervene in the economic life of the society so that
the market does not operate in a way injurious to public welfare. Another contribution of the
progressive legacy is that it focused on the self-realization of the lawyers; their commitment and
obligation to the society.

The third root directly antecedent of public interest law is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and
its offshoot the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense and
Education Fund (NAACP/LDF). ACLU was founded during the World War I and was mainly a citizens’
lobbying group. It worked to protect the democratic rights of the citizens including rights to free speech
and due process. With the help of a network of volunteer lawyers, ACLU acted as a watchdog of
governmental corruption and abuse of power.

Expansion:
In American history, the 1960s and 1970s were people’s decades. It was a time when Post World War II
technological advancements tended to dehumanize the society and Cold War/ Vietnam issue galvanized
conservatism. At the same time, however, social movements reached to astonishing peaks. Socially
conscious activist individuals and organisations proceeded to advance the causes of unrepresented
constituencies like the poor and the helpless, consumers, minorities, women and sought to eliminate a
plethora of discrimination and inequality. While so doing, they found the mechanisms of public interest
law, especially PIL, as one of their main tools.

Support came from several quarters. First, charitable organisations, often in the form of private
foundations, came forward offering financial assistance to the PIL lawyers. Contribution from
organisations such as Sierra. Club Legal Defense Fund and the Ford Foundations was crucial in the
expansion of public interest law.

Second, the Federal Government took an increasingly liberal view that was, to a considerable extent, the
result of successful PIL cases. Consequently, government funded legal aid organisations were given more
support and financial assistance; new laws relating to social and civil justice were passed; administration
became more open to the citizens with respect to its decision making process; and public interest law
firms were recognised as tax-exempt charitable organisations.

Third, the private bar and the law schools began to stress on pro bono activities. Young bright lawyers
often voluntarily ignored the lure of commercial law firms. Lawyers found involvement in PIL cases a
good way of discharging their social responsibilities.

Eventually, due to gradual progress throughout the late 1960s and 1970s, public interest law and PIL
became a part of the American legal system. By 1985, Fred Stressed could declare: Fifteen years after
the new generation of public interest law was born, the turbulent practice has survived to become a
permanent fixture on the American legal landscape.

Bangladesh adopted a progressive Constitution introducing PIL:

In 1972 with a parliamentary system of government, and making the judiciary the guarding of the
constitution to protect the fundamental rights of the people. In Bangladesh there is an emerging legal
empowerment sector involving many different organizations engaged in a multitude of justice related
interventions, each one working towards the goal of increasing access to justice and empowerment for
women and other marginalized groups. Attempts to introduce PIL in Bangladesh started in 1992. Hence,
it seems that advancement of PIL coincided with the restoration of democracy in the country in 1991.
Public Interest Litigation got great fillip with the emergence of Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers
Association (BELA). Question of locus standi has finally been settled by the Appellate Division in the
Flood Action Plan case brought by Dr. Mohiuddin Faruk, founder secretary of BELA holding that any
member of the public suffering a common wrong, common injury or common invasion of fundamental
rights of an indeterminate number of people or any citizen or an indigenous association espousing such
cause has locus standi.

After that decision Human Rights and Peace For Bangladesh (HRPB), Society of Justice and many others
organizations as well as public spirited persons brought public interest litigations before the High Court
Division for redress of the grievances of the deprived sections of people.

PIL seeks to establish the state's responsibility for its positive acts resulting in violation of constitutional
rights and to impute responsibility for the consequences of state inaction. PIL has addressed a wide-
ranging set of civil society concerns, relating to both individual rights and the broader development
agenda. PIL has itself become a part of the struggle to institutionalize democracy. Eminent lawyer Dr.
Kamal Hossain explores the prospects of PIL from the fundamental principle of state policy in his article
"Interaction of Fundamental Principles of State Policy and Fundamental Rights." He observes that
countries adopting constitutions in recent decades, especially in South Asia, have distinguished non
justifiable Fundamental Principle of State Policy from justiciable fundamental human rights in their
constitutions.

The Constitution backing for PIL: is grounded around section 102 of the Constitution. Section 102 allows
the court to pass an order where there has been a breach of fundamental rights. These are rights set out
in Part III of the constitution (and include for example: equality before the law, right to life and personal
liberty, and freedom of movement, assembly, association, thought and conscience). Section 102 allows
the court to pass an order requiring the government to do what is required by law, and not to do what is
forbidden by law to so. "An aggrieved person" can make the application to the court. It is the wide
interpretation by the courts of the term "an aggrieved person" - to include legal aid, human rights, or
development organizations - that has opened up public interest litigation. These groups can as a result
petition the court on behalf of workers, or other affected groups of people.

Once upon a time, only the aggrieved party had the locus standi (standing required in law) so that he
could personally knock the doors of justice and seek remedy for his grievance and the non-affected
persons had no locus standis, could not do so. Ultimately, there was hardly any link between the rights
guaranteed by the Constitution and the laws made by the legislature on the one hand and the vast
majority of people especially illiterate classes, on the other. This scenario gradually changed by the
modern interpretation of the judiciary that tackled the problem of 'access to justice' by people through
public interest litigation (PIL) by alterations made in the requirements of locus standi and of party
aggrieved.
Public interest litigation does promote Good Public Administration

It is submitted that the above observations should only apply to developed jurisdictions which already
have advanced mechanisms in place to check administrative abuses and mischief. In such jurisdictions
too, good governance is also the guiding principle in public administration which the government has no
qualm of encouraging it.

These comments, however, hold no water in developing countries where the executive would erect
barrier after barrier to avoid judicial review of administrative decisions. In such jurisdictions, judiciary is
the only pillar the ordinary citizens can lean on to seek redress from administrative abuses and
unreasonableness. It follows that by highlighting administrative abuses and excesses, public interest
litigation actually helps promote good governance.

If the executive is gracious enough and have the fortitude in accepting defeats in courts as well as
working hand in hand with the judiciary, in no time an efficient public administration imbued with a high
standard of good governance will emerge. In this way, judicial control brings limitless benefits to the
executive. A good public administration brings greater respect for the executive and would probably
help the executive to win and win resoundingly in every General Election. It will also receive
international acclaim for its fidelity to the rule of law and sincerity in coming to grips with administrative
injustices which often grip poor and developing countries.

Adopting judicial decisions and implementing them in the operation and management of governmental
departments will improve efficiency of public administration. It also makes the decision-makers more
accountable for their actions. After all, most of the complaints are related to procedural impropriety and
if these procedural defects can be remedied, then the substantive decisions will be less susceptible to
legal challenge.

In this regard, it is inaccurate to say that undue constraints imposed by the courts on the decision-
making process can impede the efficiency of public administration. If any constraints are imposed, that
is because the public administration has not been efficiently run. Neither is it correct to say that the time
spent in entertaining objectors delays in the implementation of the policy. At the first place, if the
government had put in much thought in it before implementing a policy, it would have been unlikely to
meet much opposition from the public. Sadly this is not the case as many a time, before the policy can
even go into full swing, the government itself is having second thoughts about it. Sometimes polices are
even changed overnight so much so that there is no certitude in government decisions.

But if any objector is a mere busybody and troublemaker, the courts have no difficulty in dealing with
such characters. One must always bear in mind that there are sufficient safeguards against malicious and
unfounded actions being filed in courts to obstruct or delay administrative action. The most lethal
weapon is that such litigants will be mulcted in costs if not impoverished by costs if he persistently files
hopeless actions to embarrass or unreasonably obstruct the administrative bodies.

Just because the impact of judicial review is diminished by the lack of knowledge and ignorance on the
part of the civil servants of the role of courts in controlling government is no excuse for the courts to
adopt a hands-off approach towards maladministration. On the contrary, the courts should not desist
from asserting their role so as to educate the civil servants on the principle of rule of law and good
governance. In fact, this educating process which is normally directed at those on the highest rung of the
civil service which will in turn help educate their subordinates of these values. While it is conceded that
sometimes non-legal factors do make more impact on the way discretionary powers are exercised, this
is usually confined to individual and isolated cases. Administrative laws will obviously impact the manner
in which these powers are exercised if such laws are grounded on good governance. Moreover, if such
laws had no impact at all, I could not understand why the executive have been so gung-ho at times in
erecting all sorts of impediments to avoid judicial review of administrative actions.

As respects the call to carefully scrutinise and parsimoniously construe associational standing, this may
be relevant to a developed legal system such as Britain where the standing criteria and right to proceed
are more flexible compared to those in developing countries. In this sense, the call to screen out any
actions filed by NGOs is reasonable within the developed system of judicial review such as Britain. On
the other hand, if this should be allowed to prevail in jurisdictions such as India, it will be a travesty of
justice where the NGOs have been the champions of the oppressed and the poor.

Merits:

The wide reach of PIL is best demonstrated by reference to some areas in which Courts have made
particularly significant pronouncements. The Court has issued orders relating to a very wide range of
PILs covering matters such as prisons and prisoners, the public, the armed forces, children, child labour,
bonded labour, urban space, environment and resources, consumer issues, education, politics and
elections, public policy and accountability, human rights and the judiciary.

Demerits:

1. The genuine causes and cases of public interest have in fact receded to the background and
irresponsible PIL activists all over the country have started to play a major but not a constructive role in
the arena of litigation. Of late, many of the PIL activists in the country have found the PIL as a handy tool
of harassment since frivolous cases could be filed without investment of heavy court fees as required in
private civil litigation and deals could then be negotiated with the victims of stay orders obtained in the
so-called PILs.

2. The framers of Bangladesh constitution did not incorporate a strict doctrine of separation of powers
but envisaged a system of checks and balances. Policy making and implementation of policy are
conventionally regarding as the exclusive domain of the executive and the legislature.

3. The flexibility of procedure that is a character of PIL has given rise to another set of problems. It gives
an opportunity to opposite parties to ascertain the precise allegation and respond specific issues.

4. The credibility of PIL process is now adversely affected by the criticism that the judiciary is
overstepping the boundaries pf its jurisdiction and that it is unable to supervise the effective
implementation of its orders. It has also been increasingly felt that PIL is being misused by the people
agitating for private grievance in the grab of public interest and seeking publicity rather than espousing
public cause.

PIL in practice: Bangladesh Perspective:

Although the Court has issued orders relating to a very wide range of PILs covering various matters, we
confine ourselves to a detailed account of three broad areas with illustrative examples.

● Environment:

The area in which PILs contribution has been significant is environmental law. This can be understood by
recent PIL on Rampal Power Plant. A public interest litigation writ petition was filed before the High
Court on September 29, 2013 seeking stay on the proposed coal-fired power plant at Rampal near
Sundarbans, the world’s largest mangrove forest, until assessment of the environmental impact of the
project. The petitioners, four lawyers of the Supreme Court, also sought the court’s directives to
constitute a committee comprising national and international experts to asses the environmental impact
of the proposed power plant. Meanwhile, the government set October 22 for laying the foundation
stone of the Rampur power plant. The PIL petitioners are advocates Asaduzzaman Siddiqui, M Eklas
Uddin Bhuiyan, Mahbubul Islam and Sayeda Shaheen Ara Laily. Secretaries to the Prime Minister’s
office, cabinet division, planning ministry, environment ministry and power ministry, director general of

the Department of Environment, chairman of the Power Development Board, Deputy Commissioner of
Bagerhat district, and director of the Rampal coal-fired Power Plant Project have been made
respondents to the case. The petition says if the proposed power plant is set up, the Sundarbans, the
world’s largest mangrove forest, and its biodiversity will be damaged. Setting up the plant near the
Sundarbans and its surrounding area will be detrimental to natural resources, biodiversity, wetland,
forest and wildlife of the locality which is against the fundamental principles of state policy and the
relevant provisions of constitution.

● Human Rights:

Judicial activism in the area of human rights has been facilitated in considerable measure by PIL. This can
be exemplified by initiatives undertaken by BLAST. Since 1996, BLAST has filed 82 public interest
litigation petitions in the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. These petitions have resulted in judicial orders
for government action to comply with statutory duties, and have led to expanded interpretations of
fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of Bangladesh. Significant PIL petitions include:
challenging arbitrary arrests and unreasonable police remand and obtaining guidelines to safeguard
persons under arrest or in police custody; challenging delays in trials of under-trial prisoners; challenging
incarceration of children in prisons; challenging continued detention of foreigners who have overstayed
their sentence in prisons; preventing forced eviction and displacement and securing alternative
rehabilitation of slum dwellers; securing consumer safety and health rights; seeking protection of
workers’ rights for safety in the workplace; challenging gender discrimination in public employment;
challenging the failure of state authorities to ensure safety and security of women through taking action
against extra-judicial penalties by informal village tribunals; obtaining directions to ensure effective
action against government servants for sexual harassment; ensuring effective and participatory local
government by challenging the establishment of bodies to be controlled by central government;
ensuring enforcement of safety standards in public transport; ensuring accountability of public
representatives by referring their payment of dues to public bodies; and directions for the establishment
of courts and furthering the separation of the judiciary from the executive in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.

● Public Accountability:

Another area of abiding public concern which the Supreme Court has dealt with in PILs good governance
and the accountability of public officials. For example, a director of the Federation of Bangladesh
Chambers and Commerce and Industry on Monday, November 20, 2012 filed a public interest litigation
writ petition seeking a High Court directive on the government to ban import, distribution and sale of
formalin treated food items. In his petition, FBCCI director Helal Uddin also sought a directive on the
authorities to ban import of all food items treated with formalin. He sought a directive on the
authorities to equip the ports with appropriate and adequate testing kits and facilities to ensure that
food items not treated with formalin alone are imported. Feeling aggrieved over formalin treated fruits,
fish, milk and other food items flooding the market, he also sought a directive on the authorities to
equip all the city markets with appropriate and adequate testing kits and facilities. He sought directive
on the authorities to create mass awareness about the hazardous effects of formalin treated food
through media campaigns, electronic and print. Helal also sought a rule on the government asking it to
explain why it should not be directed to check import, distribution and use of formalin and to ensure
that food items sold in the markets were untreated with formalin.

A writ petition was filed with the High Court September 9, 2013 seeking its directive on the government
to formulate a law incorporating a provision of death penalty for using formalin and other poisonous
chemical in food items.Supreme Court lawyer Eunus Ali Akond, who submitted the petition, also urged
the HC to direct the government to table a bill named “Formalin Control Act” in the next parliament
session. Akond filed the petition as a public interest litigation following several news items published in
different dailies including The Daily Star. The petitioner also urged the court to order the government to
take effective measure against those who use poisonous and life threatening chemicals in fruits, sweets,
meat, fish, vegetables and other products which cause liver and kidney diseases. In the petition, he said
dishonest traders and businessmen use formalin, carbide, burnt mobil, sulfur dioxide and poisonous
colour in the food items and other products, but they are not punished due to lack of specific law.

Role of Police:

Police engage in public interest litigation where constitutional rights and guarantees have been
contravened or are at risk, and where the human rights provisions of the Constitution of Bangladesh can
be protected, promoted and they indirectly help to make them deepened and broadened. They can also
challenge existing and proposed legislation where it is felt that such legislation is contrary to the
Constitution and to the principles of democracy and above all which can make chaos in the society.

On the other hand, Police engage in extensive litigation to fight impunity, lawlessness and bring
accountability to the state or state actors by exercising their power impartially. The litigation which
centers around suing the police officers for such common practices as arbitrary arrests and detentions
and torture, make police officers more accountable.

Public Interest Litigation continues to monitor and litigate in certain policing districts where the practice
of selective application of the law is rife. The Law and Order section of the police force is identified as
having involved itself extensively in selective application of justice primarily based on political or
perceptions of political affiliations. Generally this section of the entire police force in Bangladesh seems
to operate as an extension or a wing of a political party. By pursuing a number of public interest cases in
certain policing districts centering on the activities and cases involving lack of professionalism on the
part of the police and other law enforcement agents whose names always reappear in testimonies of
victims of violations.
RECOMMENDATION:

(1) The courts must encourage genuine and bona fide PIL and effectively discourage and curb the PIL
filed for extraneous considerations.

(2) Instead of every individual judge devising his own procedure for dealing with the public interest
litigation, it would be appropriate for each High Court to properly formulate rules for encouraging the
genuine PIL and discouraging the PIL filed with oblique motives. Consequently, we request that the High
Courts who have not yet framed the rules, should frame the rules within three months. The Registrar
General of each High Court is directed to ensure that a copy of the Rules prepared by the High Court is
sent to the Secretary General of this court immediately thereafter.

(3) The courts should prima facie verify the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining a P.I.L.

(4) The court should be prima facie satisfied regarding the correctness of the contents of the petition
before entertaining a PIL.

(5) The court should be fully satisfied that substantial public interest is involved before entertaining the
petition.

(6) The court should ensure that the petition which involves larger public interest, gravity and urgency
must be given priority over other petitions.

(7) The courts before entertaining the PIL should ensure that the PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine
public harm or public injury. The court should also ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive
or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation.

(8) The court should also ensure that the petitions filed by busybodies for extraneous and ulterior
motives must be discouraged by imposing exemplary costs or by adopting similar novel methods to curb
frivolous petitions and the petitions filed for extraneous considerations.
Importance:

Public interest Litigation is a topic with high profile due to it importance, relevance and necessity in
access to justice for mass people.

1. The concept of Public Interest Litigation as has emerged into the judicial administration of Bangladesh
is yet to nature with the concept of justice as guaranteed by the Constitution although it is not defined
in any statute or act. Judges to consider the intent of public at large have interpreted it.

2. At the same time as, the main and only focus of such litigation is only ‘public Interest’ there are
various areas where public Interest Litigation can be filed, PIL does not work in isolation.

3. Hope of the people has been growing in the direction of access to justice, progressively being
confident upon the judicial system of the apex court of the country. It is a part of the greater movement
for legal aid or a constituent of the greater theme of public interest law.

4. So in the hand of the social activist lawyer, PIL is one of many strategies that the concerned citizens
and activists in Bangladesh are now using in combination.

5. PIL is retaining a close nexus with the press; the voluntary sector organization is increasingly using
new strategies including publication, lobbying and representation.

6. Future of PIL in Bangladesh is very luminous and an institutional framework should be developed, we
demand from progressive government.

CONCLUSION:
A number of criticisms of PIL have been voiced in recent years, including concerns related to separation
of powers, judicial capacity, and inequality. While critics have been persuasive when pointing to
particular cases, the sheer number of cases, as well as the variation in tendencies over time and among
court benches, have made reaching a general conclusion difficult. It was argued that complaints related
to separation of powers concerns are better understood as criticisms of the impact of judicial
interventions on sectoral governance, and that structured case studies of sectoral governance are
necessary to assess those criticisms. On the issue of inequality, the understanding of overall process of
PIL contributes to an overall assessment by systematically examining the relative magnitude, case
composition, and geographical origins of, as well as legal representation and the claimant’s social class
in, PIL and Fundamental Rights cases that reached the Indian Supreme Court.

Public Interest Litigation is working as an important instrument of social change. It is working for the
welfare of every section of society. It’s the sword of every one used only for taking the justice. The
innovation of this legitimate instrument proved beneficial for the developing country like India. PIL has
been used as a strategy to combat the atrocities prevailing in society. It’s an institutional initiative
towards the welfare of the needy class of the society. However focus should be on ensuring that
reasonable restriction is carried on with the execution of the representative processes to enhance the
Fundamental & Legal rights of societies valid interest. PIL represents the first attempt by a developing
common law country to break away from legal imperialism perpetuated for centuries.

Public Interest Litigants, all over the country, have not taken very kindly to such court decisions. They do
fear that this will sound the death-knell of the people friendly concept of PIL. Only those PIL activists
who prefer to file frivolous complaints will have to pay compensation to then opposite parties. It is
actually a welcome move because no one in the country can deny that even PIL activists should be
responsible and accountable. In any way, PIL now does require a complete rethink and restructuring.
Anyway, overuse and abuse of PIL can only make it stale and ineffective. Since it is an extraordinary
remedy available at a cheaper cost to all citizens of the country, it ought not to be used by all litigants as
a substitute for ordinary ones or as a means to file frivolous complaints.

REFERENCE:

1. Naim Ahmed, Public Interest Litigation: Constitutional Issues and Remdies (Dhaka: Bangladesh Legal
Aid Service, Trust, 1999)
2. Kailash Rai, Public Inte3rest Layering legal Aid and Para-Legal Services, 3rd ed, (Allahabad: Central Law
Publication, 2005).

3. Public Interest Litigation (Dhaka: Ain O Salish Kendra, 2003)

4. http://www.belabangla.org/activities.htm.

5.http://thenewage.com.bd

6. http://www.thedailystart.net.org