 |
| Md Tauhidur Rahman |
Bangladesh's legal system is still plagued by
the structural and linguistic effects of British colonialism even after more
than 50 years of independence. The Penal Code 1860, the Evidence Act 1872, and
the Civil Procedure Code 1908 are just a few of the foundational laws that were
virtually taken verbatim from British India. The fact that the legal language
used in these laws still reflects antiquated, Eurocentric, and occasionally
offensive worldviews is even more worrisome.
The persistent use of the term
"Mohammedan Law," a colonial misrepresentation of Islamic
jurisprudence, is one obvious example. The term "Mohammedanism" has
long been disregarded in scholarly and international legal circles, and the Prophet
Muhammad (PBUH) did not create a religion by that name. Nevertheless, it
endures in our legal education, court rulings, and legislative documents.
There is no better moment for the Interim Government to start long-overdue legal reforms than now, as Bangladesh experiences a new political awakening after the July 2024 revolution, based on the principles of justice, equity, and a functional state. A truly sovereign legal identity is built on the foundation of replacing colonial-era language, which is more than just a symbolic gesture.
A
Legacy of Colonialism
Like India and Pakistan, Bangladesh's legal
system developed from laws enforced by the Crown. The colonial state imposed a
strict legal framework that aimed to classify and control its subjects,
starting with the Regulating Act 1773 and continuing through the Indian High
Courts Act 1861.
In doing so, the British made extensive use
of terminology and categorizations that oversimplified and misrepresented
regional legal and cultural customs. This vocabulary included terms like
"Pardahnashin woman" (a woman living in seclusion), "Zamindar"
(landlord), "Ryot" (tenant farmer), and "Mohammedan Law."
These terms were imposed from above and were intended to support governance
rather than justice; they did not develop naturally from within society.
Following independence in 1971,
Bangladesh adopted the Adaptation of Existing Laws Order, 1972,
retaining all colonial-era laws unless specifically amended. While this
provided much-needed legal continuity, it also meant that much of the colonial
structure—its values, priorities, and language—remained untouched.
The Importance of Terminology
Language is not neutral. Our understanding
and application of legal relationships and religious doctrines are influenced
by the terminology we use to describe them. In addition to being theologically
false, "Mohammedan Law" upholds a colonial perspective that portrays
Islamic and indigenous legal traditions as inferior or foreign.
Prominent organisations such as the Harvard
Islamic Law Blog have advocated for the removal of this term in favour of
"Islamic Law," a term that is both theologically correct and
consistent with current legal usage throughout the Muslim world. Compare this
to the commonly used, contextually accurate, and Muslim identity-respecting
term "Islamic Law." Legal systems in countries such as Egypt,
Malaysia, and even parts of India have already adopted the updated terminology
in their academic and judicial frameworks.
Keeping colonial terms in circulation sends a contradictory message: that while the nation may be free politically, its legal system remains intellectually colonised.
Momentum for Reform
Encouragingly, a quiet movement has
already begun. Many Bangladeshi law schools now teach “Islamic Law” instead of
“Mohammedan Law.” Progressive judgments from the higher judiciary have
preferred modern terminology, and legal scholars increasingly highlight the
need to decolonise both structure and language.
The Law Commission of Bangladesh has previously recommended updates to archaic statutes, though implementation has lagged. With political transitions now offering space for structural change, these efforts must be accelerated and institutionalised.
The
July 2024 Movement: An Opportunity for a New Beginning?
A pivotal moment is provided by the July 2024
revolution, which resulted from popular demands for a state that is both
functional and free from discrimination. The chance to modernise the legal
industry must be seized by the interim government, which was given the
responsibility on promises of institutional restructuring and legal reform.
Reforming our legal system's language and philosophy is just as important now
as changing the laws themselves. The remaining colonial terminology must be
replaced with words that represent our independent identity and constitutional
values in legal education, court proceedings, and public-facing documents.
Steps That Must Be Taken
All
colonial-era laws that are still in effect should undergo an immediate legal
review with the aim of repealing, replacing, or significantly reforming them.
The Supreme Court or the Ministry of Law has issued an official directive to
replace antiquated or discriminatory legal terms like "Mohammedan
Law" in all legal documents, textbooks, and proceedings. Establishing a
National Legal Reform Commission with the goals of bringing laws into
compliance with the spirit of the Constitution, guaranteeing gender-neutral and
faith-appropriate language, and decolonising legal language. To make sure any
changes are clear and practical, the public and professional community should
be involved in the reform process, particularly with academics, attorneys, and
judges. This is not merely a cosmetic reform—it is a step toward
redefining the legal system as one rooted in the values, traditions, and
aspirations of the Bangladeshi people.
Final Thoughts
The continued use of colonial legal
terminology like “Mohammedan Law” reflects a broader hesitation to fully
reclaim our intellectual and legal independence. It is time we acknowledged
that sovereignty is not just about flags and parliaments—it is also about the
language we use in our laws, courts, and classrooms. A simple terminology
change can also bring many benefits such as replacing the word “Advocate”
with “Barristers” could remove confusion between people who seek legal
advice, at the same the it will discourage people from perusing foreign legal
degrees for which we need to spend a huge amount of sum.
As Bangladesh embarks on a new chapter
of reform and reconstruction, the legal system must not be left behind. The
Interim Government has the authority, the public support, and the historical
momentum to lead this transformation.
Decolonising our legal language is not
just a matter of accuracy or dignity—it is a matter of justice.