Kathmandu [Nepal], May 18 (ANI): Members of Nepal’s lower house and the officiating Chief Justice are in a face-off over the appointment of the next Chief Justice.
The latest round of the face-off started following a written order from officiating Chief Justice Sapana Pradhan Malla directing the Supreme Court administration to register a writ petition challenging the Constitutional Council’s recommendation for the next Chief Justice. This incident exposed the intensifying division within the judiciary.
On Monday, the officiating CJ instructed the apex court administration to complete registration of the petition, giving a deadline of 1 PM (local time). However, the chief registrar and registrars reportedly went out of contact, raising further questions over compliance with the order.
The petition challenges the Constitutional Council’s May 8 recommendation of Justice Manoj Kumar Sharma for Chief Justice. It alleges that the council bypassed seniority by recommending the fourth-ranked justice instead of the senior-most candidate.
Senior advocate Dinesh Tripathi, advocate Prem Raj Silwal, and others had filed the writ petition at the Supreme Court. The court administration had earlier refused to register the petition and issued a rejection note.
The petitioners had met with the officiating Chief Justice, complaining that even the application seeking a hearing on the rejection had not been presented before a bench. Following the complaint, Malla ordered the administration to register the petition within the day.
The developments triggered sharp reactions from the legal fraternity and Parliament.
During Monday’s parliamentary meeting, lawmakers from the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) objected to officiating Chief Justice Malla’s order. Two lawmakers from the ruling party argued that directing registration of the petition went against legal practice and established norms.
“The theory of separation of power seems to have been forgotten by the court. The theory states that the executive, legislature, and the judiciary are meant to check and balance, but here there is an intent to seize power. If the judiciary steps up to that level and starts working accordingly, then it would not be able to deliver judgments,” Samikshya Bastola, a lawmaker from the RSP, said while addressing Parliament.
Another lawmaker from the same party, Yagya Mani Neupane, commented on the instance, claiming the right to discuss judicial issues in Parliament.
“The judiciary has its own methods while carrying out its duties. Today, the principle of conflict of interest has been dragged in, and directives are being issued from the chambers of the honorary justices. We don’t question the judgments delivered by the judiciary, but when it comes to the administrative processes, then we might also have to discuss those things,” Neupane said.
Following their remarks, lawmakers from the CPN-UML raised objections, arguing that parliamentary rules prohibit discussion of matters under judicial consideration.
Article 105 of the Constitution of Nepal states that “no discussion shall be held in either House of the Federal Parliament regarding matters that may adversely affect the administration of justice in relation to cases pending in any court of Nepal and regarding judicial acts performed by judges in the course of their duties.”
The filed writ petition argues that the recommendation process for the next Chief Justice violated established constitutional practice regarding the appointment of the Chief Justice, the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
A total of sixteen complaints have been filed against proposed Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Sharma, according to the Federal Parliament Secretariat. A meeting of the Parliamentary Hearing Committee under the federal parliament held on May 9 had provided a 10-day period for submitting complaints against Sharma’s nomination.
The Parliament Secretariat said on Monday that 16 complaints were registered during the given period. The hearing process on the complaints is scheduled to begin on Tuesday.
The committee has asked complainants to appear before the Parliamentary Hearing Committee meeting room at Singha Durbar on Tuesday.
Meanwhile, a written petition has also been registered with the committee demanding rejection of Sharma’s appointment as Chief Justice.
The petition, filed by Jasmin Ojha of Maitidevi, Kathmandu, raises concerns regarding Sharma’s constitutional eligibility, ethics, impartiality, and institutional integrity.
Ojha argued that any attempt to attain such a high constitutional position without fulfilling the required qualifications indicates bad faith from the outset. She has also demanded that Sharma’s appointment be rejected and, if necessary, that impeachment proceedings be initiated against him. (ANI)
Related reading
