It IS total shoirachar,
a) because there is NO balance, division or separation of power, which is lop-sided in favor of existing ‘ruling’ party al or bnp, and
b) because law itself is decided by the ‘ruling party’, its PM, judges (who are scared of being fired or retired ! ), and “law minister” (who has more power to judge than judges ! ).
c) because of such dictatorial power of ‘ruling’ party, all mechanisms of opposition are cut off, and no-one can take corrective action, against shoirachar.

Perhaps this is how the nawabs and colonials kept crime down, by keeping the other half in fear of unlawful persecution!! And so the rule continues

I think how this power is exercised depends solely on the personality of the president. Zillur “My netri can do no wrong” Rahman will obviously act in collaboration with the PMO. But if you get a president strong-willed enough, then it really depends on individual whims about how he would exercise his powers.

The simple answer is, the constitution gives the president this power. But is it that simple? Presumably it is not the individual Iajuddin or Zillur Rahman who decides ‘I am going to pardon X or Y’. Presumably the decision is taken by the office of the President.

But in our system, as President Shahabuddin once said, the president actually has nothing to do other than mazar visits. And as President B Chowdhury found out, failing to visit the right mazar on the right day is ground enough for being fired from presidency. Therefore, it seems to me that the President just pardons whoever the government (read: the PM) tells him to pardon.

But then that gets even trickier. Any first year political science student can tell you that a modern democratic state has to separate powers between executive, legislative and judicial arms of the state. If the executive (even if elected) can call rough shots over the other branches, then the state isn’t really democratic. And yet, that’s exactly what we have here. Courts can find someone guilty, and the government (read: the Prime Minister) can tell the president to pardon them. That can’t be democratic!

Why even bother with courts? Why not simply ask the Prime Minister to declare ABC guilty of XYZ crimes, and pronounce PQR innocent of everything?

http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2009-11-24/news/21406

আদালতের দেওয়া রায়কে অত্যন্ত সংগত কারণ ছাড়া নাকচ করে দেওয়া অর্থাত্ শাস্তিপ্রাপ্ত দোষীকে ক্ষমা করা কি বিচারব্যবস্থার অবমাননা নয়? স্বজনপ্রীতি জিনিসটি খুবই নিন্দনীয়। এবং স্বজনপ্রীতিরও একটি স্তর থাকে। সেই স্তর অতিক্রম বাঞ্ছনীয় নয়।
আমরা স্বাধীনতা ও মুক্তিযুদ্ধের চেতনার কথা অনর্গল বলি। সে চেতনা হলো: আত্মসম্মানবোধ, আত্মনির্ভরশীলতা, গণতন্ত্র ও ন্যায়বিচার।

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=115347

Attorney General Mahbubey Alam yesterday told The Daily Star that he (Akbar Sobhan) is a fugitive from the law, and he has no right to move such petition before the High Court.

Shah Alam was sentenced to a total of 10 years’ imprisonment in two cases filed on charges of money laundering and tax dodging during the caretaker government. He, however, did not surrender before the trial court in connection with any of the cases.