Natural justice stands as a fundamental principle within the common law system, serving to protect fairness, transparency, and integrity in judicial and administrative processes. Although not formally enshrined in legislation, its core tenets—the right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem) and the rule against bias (nemo judex in causa sua)—have been shaped and affirmed through judicial pronouncements over time. These principles function as essential safeguards against arbitrary or unjust decision-making, ensuring that individuals are given a meaningful opportunity to present their case before an impartial authority. Regardless of the setting in which they are applied, the enduring importance of procedural fairness underpins public confidence in the justice system and reinforces the rule of law.

The notion of natural justice has evolved within Bangladesh's legal system from its British common law roots. Though not explicitly enshrined in our constitution, it is upheld through judicial interpretation and case law, influenced by the UK and post-colonial Indian legal traditions. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh, particularly through Article 102 of the constitution, plays a crucial role in enforcing these principles by issuing writs when the legal rights of people are violated. Courts have consistently ruled that administrative and quasi-judicial bodies must adhere to the principle of natural justice, even in the absence of statutory mandates, especially when decisions affect individual rights, livelihoods, or reputations. Violations, such as denial of a fair hearing or evident bias, often prompt judicial intervention through writs like certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition. The doctrine of legitimate expectation further reinforces the obligation to ensure fair treatment and consultation in public law decisions. While the application of natural justice in administrative matters allows some flexibility, authorities are still expected to act in good faith, ensure fair hearings, and avoid conflicts of interest, with the courts empowered to review and nullify decisions when these principles are breached.

Constitutional status and enforcement of the notion of natural justice vary across countries. While the core values remain consistent, the US provides explicit constitutional protections, the UK relies on common law traditions, India blends constitutional provisions with active judicial interpretation, and Bangladesh upholds natural justice through judicial enforcement of broader constitutional rights.

Read more

Can a new law balance cybersecurity and free expression?

In Bangladesh, natural justice is not explicitly stated in the constitution but is upheld through Articles 27 and 31, which ensure equality before the law and protection from arbitrary actions. Article 102 empowers the High Court Division to enforce these rights and invalidate decisions violating natural justice. Judicial interpretation plays a vital role in safeguarding fair hearings and impartiality, compensating for the absence of direct constitutional language. Any person, citizen or not, may invoke Article 102 of the constitution to seek a remedy for violation of natural justice in Bangladesh.

However, despite being fundamental to a fair legal system, the principles of natural justice face numerous systemic challenges in Bangladesh that hinder their consistent application. Procedural fairness and judicial impartiality are often compromised due to factors such as legal illiteracy, excessive bureaucratic discretion, judicial delays, political interference, and corruption. Many citizens and administrative officials remain unaware of their rights to fair hearings and available remedies. Arbitrary decision-making by the officials connected with the affairs of the authorities is common, especially in areas like land acquisition, adjudication of statutory power and licensing, due to a lack of clear guidelines. Court backlogs delay justice, while political and corrupt influences and interference weaken impartiality. Institutional accountability in almost all affairs is limited, allowing procedural impropriety. Moreover, inadequate training of judges, government officials, and personnel connected with the administration of justice often leads to flawed, unlawful, arbitrary, or biased decisions. Consequently, the enforcement of the rule of natural justice remains significantly constrained, undermining both the legal system's integrity and the rule of law.

To overcome the challenges, several key steps should be taken. Legal institutions must be reformed by enforcing a strict code of conduct, ensuring transparency, and holding officials accountable, followed by strict disciplinary action. Anti-corruption efforts should include digital case management systems, regular audits, and strong penalties and disciplinary action against corrupt practices. Judicial independence must be protected by introducing constitutional safeguards and creating independent and impartial bodies for appointing judges. Compulsory training programmes should be provided to judges, lawyers, and administrative officers regularly to build their understanding of the principles of natural justice, legal and ethical responsibilities. To reduce case backlogs, the judiciary should be strengthened with more manpower, other logistic support, digital tools, and alternative dispute resolution methods. Finally, fair and transparent recruitment and promotion systems must be established in judicial and administrative services to promote meritocracy over favouritism.

Read more

Does the Eighth Amendment judgment prevent HC decentralisation?

As Bangladesh transitions into a new political era after August 2024, there is a renewed sense of optimism about restoring natural justice, an ideal that has been significantly weakened in recent years by persistent allegations of political bias, state repression, and manipulation of legal institutions. The interim government has signalled a clear commitment to reform, emphasising the independence of the judiciary, the importance of fairness, impartiality, and the right to a fair hearing, principles that were often disregarded in the past. While legal experts and civil society groups remain cautiously hopeful, they stress the urgent need for concrete, measurable reforms that uphold the rule of law, good governance, and the access to justice for all to safeguard individual freedoms and protect the administration and judiciary from political influence and interference. At this critical juncture, reestablishing the principle of natural justice is not merely an aspirational goal; it is an essential cornerstone for establishing the rule of law, good governance and access to justice to restore public confidence in democratic institutions.

Barrister Md Anwar Hossen is advocate at the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. He can be reached at [email protected].

Views expressed in this article are the author's own. 

Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.