HC dismisses writ challenging legality of ban on AL activities

High Court Rejects Challenge to Awami League Activity Ban

Thebangladaily.com – The High Court has dismissed a writ petition that sought to question the legality of a government notification prohibiting activities of the Bangladesh Awami League and its affiliated bodies. The court found that the petition had not been properly brought before it.

A High Court bench headed by Justice JBM Hassan issued the order on Sunday, bringing the immediate legal challenge to an end. The petition had been filed by Munshiganj resident Md Al Amin on September 7, with Advocate Yunus Ali appearing on his behalf.

What the Petition Requested

The writ asked the court to issue a rule seeking an explanation as to why the notification of May 12, 2025 should not be declared to have been issued without lawful authority. It also sought an order suspending implementation of the notification while the proposed rule was pending before the court.

By dismissing the petition on the ground that it was not properly raised, the High Court did not grant either of those requests. The notification therefore remains in effect under its existing terms.

The case centered on a major government decision involving one of Bangladesh’s most prominent political parties. Legal challenges of this nature generally require the petitioner to present a properly framed basis for the court’s intervention, including a clear explanation of the legal right involved and the grounds on which an official action is being challenged.

Scope of the Government Notification

The Public Security Division under the Ministry of Home Affairs issued the notification on May 12, 2025. It barred all activities of the Bangladesh Awami League, as well as its affiliated, associate and fraternal organisations, until proceedings involving the party’s leaders and activists before the International Crimes Tribunal are completed.

The order applies broadly to political and organisational activity. Its restrictions cover publications and publicity conducted through mass media, online platforms and social media. It also prohibits public political events, including processions, meetings, rallies and conferences.

As a result, the notification reaches beyond a single form of party activity. It covers both physical gatherings and communications carried through traditional and digital channels. The reference to affiliated, associate and fraternal organisations means the restrictions are not limited solely to the central Awami League structure.

Link to International Crimes Tribunal Proceedings

The stated duration of the prohibition is tied to the completion of trials involving Awami League leaders and activists before the International Crimes Tribunal. The notification does not establish a fixed calendar end date. Instead, its operation is connected to the conclusion of those judicial proceedings.

This makes the tribunal process central to understanding the continuing effect of the ban. Until the specified trials are completed, the government order prohibits the activities listed in the notification. The High Court’s dismissal leaves that framework unchanged for now.

The International Crimes Tribunal has been a significant institution in Bangladesh’s legal and political landscape. Its role in this matter is specifically referenced in the notification as the point at which the prohibition on party-related activities will cease to apply.

Why the Court Order Matters

The dismissal is important because the writ had sought both a judicial declaration against the notification and temporary relief from its enforcement. Neither form of relief was granted. In practical terms, the government’s restrictions continue without a court-ordered suspension arising from this case.

The order also illustrates the distinction between a court examining the substance of a government decision and a court declining to proceed with a petition because of the way it has been presented. The High Court stated that the writ had not been properly raised, meaning the challenge did not move forward in the form brought by the petitioner.

No broader ruling overturning or validating every aspect of the notification was issued through the dismissal. What is clear from the order is that this particular petition did not succeed in securing a rule or a stay.

Restrictions Remain in Force

For members, supporters and organisations connected with the Bangladesh Awami League, the notification continues to set the legal boundary for public activity. The barred conduct includes distributing publications, conducting publicity through media or online channels, and organising events such as meetings, rallies, conferences and processions.

The ban’s reach into online and social-media activity reflects the range of ways political communication is now carried out. The inclusion of mass media, internet platforms and public gatherings places both digital messaging and conventional political mobilisation within the notification’s scope.

The High Court’s latest order does not alter those restrictions. The legal position following Sunday’s decision is that the May 12, 2025 notification remains operative while the tribunal-related condition set out in it has not been met.

The dismissal concludes this attempt to challenge the measure, while the wider issues connected to the notification, the tribunal proceedings and the future of the prohibited activities remain matters of public and legal significance.