Liberalizing ‘Locus standi’ in the Mohiuddin Farooque Case: Whether a De-novo Constitutional Transplantation or a Doctrinal Evolution

Abstract

During the modern period, the states are increasingly focusing on public welfare, rather than just policing the people. To meet the purposes of a welfare state, the modern procedural jurisprudence has widened the scope of access to justice by introducing ‘Public Interest Litigation.’ Through such kinds of litigations, the concept of locus standi, i.e., the right to sue, has been liberalized for people who are not directly interested in dispute matters. In Bangladesh, Dr. Mohiuddin Farooque vs. Bangladesh (1996) is the landmark case by which liberalization of the concept of ‘locus standi’ has been precedented. The interpretative judgment of this case made a turning point in viewing public interest litigations under the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. While the judgment broadened constitutional interpretation, debate persists over whether this liberalization represents a de-novo constitutional transplantation, or a doctrinal evolution. From the perspective of comparative constitutional law and interpretation principles, the present study examines the conceptual evolution of the liberalizing ideas, relevant constitutional texts, case-precedents, etc. and proposes a definitive resolution to the interpretive debate and its broader impact on constitutional discourse in Bangladesh.