Bangladesh’s Third Language Vision Must Include the Judiciary

The Government of Bangladesh’s recent initiative to encourage the learning of a third language alongside Bangla and English deserves widespread appreciation. In an era defined by global mobility, international commerce, cross border crime and digital connectivity, multilingualism is no longer an academic luxury. It is a national necessity. Yet one institution remains largely absent from this conversation: the judiciary.

The proposal has also prompted a deeply personal reflection. My beliefs that judges should learn foreign languages and sign language did not emerge from policy papers or academic research. It began in childhood.

I vividly remember a Christian missionary priest who frequently visited our home to converse with my elder brother. His Bengali was imperfect and his English unfamiliar to my young ears, but watching two people communicate across linguistic boundaries fascinated me. I did not fully understand their conversation. I only understood that language possessed an extraordinary power to connect people from different corners of the worlds.

That curiosity continued throughout my school years. As a student of Class Nine, I occasionally attended Islamiat classes, not because I was required to, but because I wanted to learn Arabic. The excitement of greeting my classmates with a few newly learned Arabic expressions remains one of my happiest school memories. At home, my late father regularly taught me Hindu Dharma. His patient guidance ensured that I developed a deeper understanding of my own religious tradition while cultivating respect for another language and culture. Looking back, I realise that language learning was never simply about vocabulary. It was about understanding people, traditions and different ways of thinking.

Years later, during my higher secondary education, I chose Sanskrit instead of History as an optional subject. At that time, many considered Sanskrit to be a language with little practical value. Even so, learning it introduced me to a rich intellectual tradition and strengthened my belief that no language is ever truly dead. Every language preserves a civilisation, a philosophy and a unique way of seeing the world.

After joining the Bangladesh Judicial Service, that childhood curiosity remained with me. As I approached the later years of my judicial career, I felt a strong desire to learn another foreign language. It was not for promotion, overseas employment or academic recognition. It was simply the satisfaction of learning something new. Inspired by my nephew, who studied German in Germany, I began learning Spanish through YouTube and the Duolingo application. After nearly a year of self study, I felt the need for structured learning. I enrolled in the Institute of Modern Languages at the University of Dhaka and successfully completed the one-year junior course in French during my weekly holidays.

Many people asked why I wanted to learn another language at that stage of my career. My answer was always simple. There was no personal gain to be achieved. I learned because I enjoyed learning. Sometimes I even wondered whether it would be possible to learn every language in the world. Although impossible, the thought reflected a lifelong belief that every language opens a new window to understanding humanity.Only later did I realise that this lifelong interest had a much larger significance.

Language is the foundation of justice.

Every courtroom functions through communication. Judges depend upon the words of litigants, witnesses, lawyers, investigators and interpreters to discover the truth. Whenever communication breaks down, justice becomes more difficult to achieve.

Bangladesh’s courts are increasingly dealing with cases involving human trafficking, cybercrime, international commercial disputes and foreign nationals. Victims, accused persons or witnesses may speak neither Bangla nor English. Although interpreters play an indispensable role, a judge with even a basic understanding of another language is often better placed to appreciate testimony, identify misunderstandings and conduct proceedings with greater confidence.

The same need exists in relation to sign language.

Article 27 of the Constitution of Bangladesh guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the law. Article 29(3)(a) permits special measures for disadvantaged sections of society. These constitutional guarantees must find practical expression in courtrooms. For citizens who are deaf or speech impaired, sign language is not merely a communication tool. It is their primary language. If courts cannot communicate effectively with them, equal access to justice remains incomplete.

Our laws already recognise this principle. Section 119 of the Evidence Act, 1872 allows witnesses who cannot communicate orally to give evidence through writing or signs. Likewise, Section 364 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 requires interpretation whenever evidence is recorded in a language not understood by the accused or the witness. These provisions recognise a simple truth. Justice cannot exist without effective communication.

I witnessed the practical importance of this issue during my judicial service. In a case before the Nari O Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Women and Children Repression Prevention) Tribunal in Dhaka, a young woman with hearing and speech impairments had been presented as the victim of an alleged abduction. During the bail hearing, however, she communicated directly with the court through finger gestures that led to sign language. She expressed her wish to remain with the accused and indicated that her relationship was based on affection and love rather than coercion. The court understood her intentions and granted bail. The experience left a lasting impression on me. It demonstrated how important it is for judges to understand the language of those who cannot speak in the conventional sense.

 This is not an isolated concern.

The United Nations General Assembly has proclaimed 23 September as the International Day of Sign Languages to raise awareness of the importance of sign languages in ensuring the full realization of the human rights of deaf people. According to the World Federation of the Deaf, more than 70 million deaf people worldwide rely on sign languages as their primary means of communication. Ensuring their equal participation in judicial proceedings requires more than interpreters. It requires judicial officers who understand the importance of communication beyond spoken words.

Other public institutions in Bangladesh have already recognised the value of multilingual competence. The Bangladesh Police now provides foreign language training for officers serving in international peacekeeping missions and specialised assignments. As judicial responsibilities increasingly involve international legal issues, similar opportunities should be extended to judges.

The proposal is neither costly nor difficult to implement. Introductory sign language training should become a compulsory component of foundation training at the Judicial Administration Training Institute. Foreign language courses such as Arabic, French, Spanish or Chinese may be offered as elective modules according to the interests and professional needs of judicial officers. Such training would complement, not replace, the use of professional interpreters.

My own journey with languages began with the childhood curiosity listening to a missionary priest. It continued through Arabic lessons, Sanskrit studies, French classes and Spanish practice many years later. Looking back, I realise that what began as a personal fascination with languages eventually became a professional calling. The ability to communicate across languages is not simply an educational achievement. It is an important judicial skill.

As Bangladesh moves towards a multilingual future, the judiciary should not remain outside that vision. A judge who understands more than one language does not merely acquire another skill. Such a judge becomes better equipped to understand people from different cultures, backgrounds and circumstances. That understanding strengthens fairness, promotes inclusion and ultimately improves the administration of justice.

The Government’s proposal to promote a third language is therefore more than an educational reform. It is an opportunity to make the justice system more accessible, more inclusive and better prepared for the realities of a changing world.

The views, opinions, and arguments expressed in published articles are solely those of the respective authors.
Jus Civitas does not necessarily endorse or assume responsibility for the accuracy or viewpoints presented.