Awami League rejects its ban by Bangladesh interim govt, vows to continue operations
Dhaka/New Delhi, May 11 (PTI): Bangladesh's deposed prime minister Sheikh Hasina-led Awami League on Sunday rejected "with disgust" the interim government's decision to ban the party and vowed to continue its operations despite the restriction.
The Muhammad Yunus-led interim government’s Council of Advisers or the Cabinet on Saturday night slapped a ban on “all activities of Awami League”, including in cyberspace, under an anti-terrorism law.
Reacting to the move, in a strongly worded statement posted on X, the Awami League said, “We are rejecting and protesting the fascist autocrat Yunus government’s decision with disgust...Awami League will carry on its activities in an appropriate course, defying the decision of the fascist Yunus government.”
The party regretted that “today’s independent Bangladesh” had to witness the ban on Awami League activities by an “undemocratic fascist” government that now runs the country “without people's mandate”, while the country “earned independence and sovereignty under its (Awami League’s) leadership”.
Formed in 1949, the Awami League led the movement for the autonomy of Bengalis in the then East Pakistan for decades and eventually led the Liberation War in 1971.
The statement said the ban is meant to “exile the spirit, ideals, and core values of the Liberation War and to empower the vulgar resurgence of anti-independence elements” and “only an anti-state and anti-independence evil force alone”.
“We strongly believe that the people of Bangladesh will deliver a resounding response to this reckless decision by the fascist Yunus regime. We call upon all leaders and activists of Awami League to stand shoulder to shoulder with the people and build a total resistance against this incoherent and anti-people decision,” it said.
Awami League also called upon all democratic states, institutions, and leaders around the world to denounce the decision taken by the Yunus government.
Earlier in the day, Yunus’s press secretary Shafiqul Alam in a media briefing said the democratic world was unlikely to oppose the interim government's decision to ban “this shameless, killer, anti-democracy, and corrupt party”.
He said there are instances of the Western world banning political parties for their activities against the national interest and for committing crimes against humanity, like the Nazi and Fascist parties of Germany and Italy.
“So we don’t expect any negative international reaction over the ban on Awami League activities,” Alam said.
The Election Commission (EC) has said it is awaiting a formal government notification to decide on scrapping the registration of the Awami League.
According to Bangladesh law, if the Awami League's registration with the EC is cancelled, it will be disqualified from contesting the general election, which could be held between December 2025 and June 2026.
“We will have to decide going with the spirit of the present Bangladesh," Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) AMM Nasir Uddin told reporters here.
Hasina’s 16-year-long Awami League regime was toppled on August 5 last year in a student-led violent mass uprising, prompting the 77-year-old former prime minister to flee to India.
Three days after her ouster, Yunus took charge as the chief adviser of the interim government.
Hasina and many of her party leaders have been facing hundreds of cases, including those of mass murder and corruption, since then. Most of her party leaders and ministers in her government have either been arrested or fled abroad.
The announcement to ban Hasina’s Awami League came after the student-led newly-floated National Citizen Party (NCP) activists rallied since Thursday and carried out blockades across Dhaka demanding the ban.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Supreme Court strikes down Trump's sweeping tariffs, upending central plank of economic agenda
Washington (AP): The Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump's far-reaching global tariffs on Friday, handing him a significant loss on an issue crucial to his economic agenda.
The 6-3 decision centres on tariffs imposed under an emergency powers law, including the sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs he levied on nearly every other country.
It's the first major piece of Trump's broad agenda to come squarely before the nation's highest court, which he helped shape with the appointments of three conservative jurists in his first term.
The majority found that the Constitution “very clearly” gives Congress the power to impose taxes, which include tariffs. “The Framers did not vest any part of the taxing power in the Executive Branch,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.
Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
“The tariffs at issue here may or may not be wise policy. But as a matter of text, history, and precedent, they are clearly lawful,” Kavanaugh wrote in the dissent.
The majority did not address whether companies could get refunded for the billions they have collectively paid in tariffs. Many companies, including the big-box warehouse chain Costco, have already lined up for refunds in court, and Kavanaugh noted the process could be complicated.
“The Court says nothing today about whether, and if so how, the Government should go about returning the billions of dollars that it has collected from importers. But that process is likely to be a mess,' as was acknowledged at oral argument,” he wrote.
The tariffs decision doesn't stop Trump from imposing duties under other laws. While those have more limitations on the speed and severity of Trump's actions, top administration officials have said they expect to keep the tariff framework in place under other authorities.
The Supreme Court ruling comes despite a series of short-term wins on the court's emergency docket that have allowed Trump to push ahead with extraordinary flexes of executive power on issues ranging from high-profile firings to major federal funding cuts.
The Republican president has been vocal about the case, calling it one of the most important in US history and saying a ruling against him would be an economic body blow to the country. But legal opposition crossed the political spectrum, including libertarian and pro-business groups that are typically aligned with the GOP. Polling has found tariffs aren't broadly popular with the public, amid wider voter concern about affordability.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to levy tariffs. But the Trump administration argued that a 1977 law allowing the president to regulate importation during emergencies also allows him to set tariffs. Other presidents have used the law dozens of times, often to impose sanctions, but Trump was the first president to invoke it for import taxes.
Trump set what he called "reciprocal" tariffs on most countries in April 2025 to address trade deficits that he declared a national emergency. Those came after he imposed duties on Canada, China and Mexico, ostensibly to address a drug trafficking emergency.
A series of lawsuits followed, including a case from a dozen largely Democratic-leaning states and others from small businesses selling everything from plumbing supplies to educational toys to women's cycling apparel.
The challengers argued the emergency powers law doesn't even mention tariffs and Trump's use of it fails several legal tests, including one that doomed then-President Joe Biden's USD 500 billion student loan forgiveness program.
The economic impact of Trump's tariffs has been estimated at some USD 3 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The Treasury has collected more than USD 133 billion from the import taxes the president has imposed under the emergency powers law, federal data from December shows.
