The Office of the Attorney General (AG) has come under scrutiny following the appointment of an unprecedented number of state law officers under the current interim government, raising questions about political patronage, administrative efficiency, and use of public funds.
According to official data and multiple legal sources, nearly 350 law officers—including deputy attorneys general (DAGs) and assistant attorneys general (AAGs)—have been appointed to represent the state in the Supreme Court. Critics argue that the volume of appointments far exceeds institutional needs and risks turning the AG Office into a rehabilitation centre for political activists.
At present, 332 DAGs and AAGs are working under AG Office, alongside three additional attorneys general. Legal experts say this figure is unprecedented in the country’s judicial history.
By comparison, during the final years of the ousted Awami League government, the number of law officers stood at around 215, which was itself widely criticised at the time as excessive. Legal observers now note that even that record has been surpassed.
Despite the large number of appointees, AG Office reportedly lacks sufficient physical space to accommodate them. Several law officers are said to be operating from their private chambers rather than from within the office premises.
Among the current appointees, political affiliations appear to be widespread. At least 78 law officers are reportedly closely linked to the Awami League, including 63 AAGs. Around 182 are considered ideologically aligned with BNP, of whom at least 64 serve as DAGs. In addition, 22 law officers are associated with Jamaat-e-Islami, while five are believed to support National Citizen Party (NCP). A small number are also linked to left-leaning political groups, according to legal sources.
Some of those appointed under the current government are alleged to have been active supporters of the previous Awami League administration. Legal insiders claim several appointees are rarely seen in court and lack regular Supreme Court practice.
Following the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s government amid mass protests, President Mohammed Shahabuddin appointed senior Supreme Court lawyer and BNP Human Rights Secretary Md Asaduzzaman as attorney general on 8 August 2024. His predecessor, AM Amin Uddin, resigned the previous day.
At that point, 215 law officers were serving in AG Office. By 12 August, 67 of them resigned.
Subsequent appointments unfolded rapidly over the following months. On 13 August, the government appointed three additional attorneys general along with nine DAGs.
This was followed by a major round of recruitment on 28 August, when 66 DAGs and 161 AAGs were appointed in a single move, alongside the dismissal of all remaining law officers appointed during the Awami League era.
The expansion continued on 18 March with the appointment of 34 new AAGs, and again on 4 November, when 41 DAGs and 67 AAGs were added. According to sources within AG Office, lawyers aligned with the Awami League were appointed in nearly every phase, despite the change in political leadership.
Legal analysts argue that the current scale of appointments is neither justified nor functional. According to senior lawyers, based on the total number of benches, the High Court Division would require around 132 law officers, with one DAG and one AAG per bench, while the Appellate Division would need no more than 30. Although certain complex benches may require additional law officers, experts maintain that the current figure of more than 330 appointees is grossly disproportionate, inefficient, and represents a significant and unnecessary burden on the state exchequer.
Appointments to AG Office are governed by the Bangladesh Law Officers Order, 1972, which allows for the appointment of a “necessary number” of law officers. Critics argue that the term has been interpreted too loosely.
Former state law officer Ashraf-uz-Zaman described the situation as deeply ironic.
“Nearly 300 of the current law officers are active political workers,” he said. “Many are even linked to the fallen government. What greater irony can there be? Is the Attorney General’s Office now a rehabilitation centre for political activists?”
Responding to criticism that one law officer cannot handle hundreds of cases, Ashraf-uz-Zaman rejected the argument outright.
“A capable DAG can easily conduct hearings in 500 cases,” he said, citing examples of senior judges who disposed of hundreds of cases in a single day. “It’s about merit and efficiency, not numbers.”
However, others argue that quantity has replaced competence in recent appointments. Several senior lawyers allege that individuals with little or no Supreme Court practice—some unfamiliar with the distinction between the Supreme Court Bar and the Bangladesh Bar Council—have been appointed through political recommendations.
DAG Sharif U Ahmed defended the appointments, stating that law officers work as a team and that the volume of cases and expectations from authorities can justify additional recruitment.
He also claimed that the legal arena has yet to be fully “de-fascistised”, arguing that removing collaborators of the previous regime would significantly reduce current numbers.
Yet leaders of the Nationalist Lawyers’ Forum expressed concern.
Former Supreme Court unit senior vice-president Monir Hossain said the appointments indicate that “fascist elements” still remain within the Law Ministry.
Senior lawyer Jamil Akhtar Elahi echoed the sentiment, citing a lack of transparency and warning that political influence continues to dominate recruitment.
Forum central organising secretary Gazi Kamrul Islam Sajol went further, alleging that nearly 100 collaborators of the former regime remain in office.
“How were they appointed after the mass uprising?” he asked. “It appears there is a ghost in the mustard seeds.”
He warned of street protests if such appointees are not removed.
Repeated attempts to contact Law Adviser Asif Nazrul and Law Secretary Liaqat Ali Mollah for comment were unsuccessful.
