By Deepak Joshi Pokhrel
The same story and the same nature. The story featuring Cholendra Shamsher JBR as the main character has re-emerged drawing the attention of people from all walks of life. The politics over this episode has made our judiciary a subject of ridicule. In plain words, it has become a laughing stock. Amidst this politics, the General Secretary of the Federal Parliament Secretariat, Bharat Raj Gautam has drawn widespread flak for overstepping his mandate work at Rana’s behest
Nepal’s Supreme Court had become a battleground of a sort in November 2021 after its sitting judges, some former chief justices, justices and advocates stood in a protest demanding the resignation of Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher Rana accusing him of being involved in collusion with political parties to secure ministerial berths for his relatives. On February 13 as many as 98 lawmakers filed a motion of impeachment against Rana accusing him of seeking a ministerial berth in the cabinet. Rana was accused of forcing the ruling alliance to appoint his man as a cabinet minister back in October 2021
As the country got busy with festivals and elections, everyone seemed to have forgotten Rana as he went about his business without much fuss. But if anyone thought he would quietly slide into oblivion, Rana has proven them wrong.
The tenure of the new parliament is yet to begin. Rana took the advantage of the transitional period and attempted to stage his comeback. So, he got Bharat Raj Gautam, the General Secretary of the Federal Parliament Secretariat to support him in his attempt to come back. In this episode, Bharat Raj Gautam risks facing the music for overstepping his mandate to work at Rana’s behest.
But Friday’s decision of the Supreme Court has shattered the dreams of Rana to make a comeback. The Supreme Court (SC) has issued a preliminary verdict that the suspended office bearers of constitutional bodies cannot resume their office until the impeachment motion is brought to a logical end.
A Constitutional Bench of the SC on Friday issued the verdict in response to a writ petition filed against the letter issued by the General Secretary of the Federal Parliament Secretariat, Bharat Raj Gautam, on Wednesday to the suspended Chief Justice, Cholendra SJB Rana, stating that the impeachment motion filed against him was already ineffective. The letter had paved the way for Rana to resume his office.
The SC Constitutional Bench has ruled that an impeachment motion against any office bearer of constitutional bodies will remain effective even if the term of the House of Representatives (HoR) that initiated the action expired halfway. In addition, it ruled that the suspended Chief Justice cannot resume his office mainly on two grounds. First, the impeachment motion filed against Rana at the HoR has not come to a logical end yet and there has been a decision earlier to carry forward the motion to the new parliament. Second, the administrative chief of the federal parliament does not have the right to exercise the rights of sovereign parliament.
With Friday’s verdict of the Supreme Court, Rana’s dream to stage a comeback has come to an end. But what is not understandable is what led him to take this unethical move. It is also very surprising that he decided to stage a comeback when is retiring from office on Tuesday, 13 December, due to the 65 age year limit for justice and chief justice.
The impeachment motion filed against CJ Rana will now be submitted to the newly-elected HoR. Since Rana will have already retired from his office, there would be no point in taking forward the impeachment motion. Should the impeachment motion be endorsed by a two-thirds majority, the parliament can still investigate the corruption and money laundering cases Rana faces.
Meanwhile, the letter sent by the general secretary of the Federal Parliament Secretariat Gautam to the key state offices on Wednesday saying that the impeachment motion registered against Rana in the erstwhile HoR had become ineffective has created ripples in the country’s judicial and political circles. He has been widely criticised for overstepping his mandate to work at the behest of Rana.
Many political observers say that it is a lust for power that drove him to take such an immoral decision. They also argue that his decision has not only tarnished his already tainted image but also made our judiciary system a subject of ridicule. This clearly reflects that our bureaucrats, politicians, leaders and public figures tend to defy all constitutional laws to ensure that they remained in power indefinitely.
This is not the first we have witnessed such an immoral and unconstitutional move on the part of our bureaucrats, politicians, leaders and public figure. In May 2017, an impeachment motion was filed against the then chief justice Sushila Karki by Maoist Centre and Nepali congress. Among the three pillars of democracy, our judiciary system has been viewed as the most powerful pillar in defending and strengthening democracy. It is also said that our judiciary has stood firm in defying external interference and pressure.
But the issues related to the judiciary that emerge time and again have compelled us to rethink its role in protecting our sovereignty.
Login to add a comment