Bangladesh

Basic information Substance of the ruling  Accessibility of the case and further relevant links
Date Name of the case (or case number)   The body delivering the decision  Keywords, topic Executive part Brief summary Full text Page at the website of the issuing court Page in other databases Unofficial materials, press communications 
02. 08. 2021 No. VC 101 (17) Supreme Court of Bangladesh  Right to health; Right to vaccination  Claim upheld  This case is related to the right to vaccination. Since the outbreak of COVID-19 thousands of expectant mothers and children died as a result of COVID-19 symptoms in Bangladesh. If pregnant women received the vaccine as a priority, the number of deaths could be reduced. However, expectant mothers have had their right to vaccination violated as they have not been able to register for the vaccine in the Surokkha App. So four attorneys (including a pregnant attorney) filed a writ petition, asking for instructions on priority vaccination for pregnant women. The Court issued a verbal order on August 2, 2021, ordering the government to decide in 72 hours whether pregnant women would be allowed to receive the COVID-19 vaccine and then the appropriate state bodies informed the health services about the implementation at the earliest as practically achievable.   https://supremecourt.gov.bd/web/ https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/bangladesh-supreme-court-bangladesh-high-court-division-no-vc-101-17-2021-08-02

https://archive.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/court/2021/08/02/covid-19-high-court-wants-decision-within-72hrs-on-inoculating-pregnant-women;

https://www.thedailystar.net/health/healthcare/news/covid-19-vaccine-and-pregnancy-addressing-concerns-2161941;

https://www.thedailystar.net/views/opinion/news/covid-19-vaccine-safe-pregnant-women-and-breastfeeding-mothers-2142416; 

25. 11.  2020 decision no. 4611/2020. Supreme Court of Bangladesh  Right to access to justice; Procedural law; Virtual hearings  Claim rejected. The face-to-face court trial faced hindrance due to the Covid-19 pandemic. To address this situation, the national parliament adopted a law on the validation of the virtual court system. PIL (Public Interest Litigation) has been filed against this act, because a virtual hearing may violate fundamental rights to a public trial. It was rejected by the Court, as it found that the Constitution of Bangladesh does not state that such proceedings must take place within the physical structure of the courtroom. A virtual trial conducted by video-conference is accessible to all concerned and any interested member of the public. http://www.supremecourt.gov.bd/resources/documents/1792136_WritPetition4611of2020.pdf   https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/bangladesh-supreme-court-bangladesh-high-court-division-no-4611-2020-11-25

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/regarding-pil-challenging-virtual-court-proceedings-nafiz-ahmed; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362207654_Initiation_of_Virtual_Court_System_during_COVID-19_Pandemic_and_E-Judiciary_Challenges_and_Way_Forward;

https://www.thedailystar.net/law-our-rights/news/virtual-courts-bangladesh-prospects-and-challenges-1903678; 

https://www.ilkogretim-online.org/fulltext/218-1663678239.pdf;

https://www.lawyersnjurists.com/article/development-of-public-interest-litigation-in-bangladesh/

24. 03. 2020 No. 3817 Supreme Court of Bangladesh  Right to health; Right to vaccination  Claim upheld Many private hospitals and clinics refused to treat patients on the grounds that their staff did not have adequate safety equipment. A writ petition has been filed against a rule issued against the refusal of treatment of patiens. The Court pointed out that refusal of treatment is a violation of the fundamental rights of citizens.     https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/bangladesh-supreme-court-bangladesh-high-court-division-no-3817-2020-03-24 https://www.tbsnews.net/bangladesh/court/legal-action-will-be-taken-against-hospitals-refuse-treatment-patients-hc-93592