By Our Reporter
The Supreme Court’s decision to quash the petition filed against the appointments of 52 office bearers in various constitutional bodies four years ago has drawn criticism from key political parties, including the ruling Nepali Congress, lawyers and constitution experts.
Even the five-member Constitutional Bench was divided, with three justices endorsing the appointments and two, including Chief Justice Prakash Man Singh Raut, registering their differing opinions.
In the five-member bench, justices Sapana Pradhan Malla, Manoj Kumar Sharma and Kumar Chudal stood in favour of endorsing the appointments, while Chief Justice Raut and Justice Nahakul Subedi opposed.
The Constitutional Council recommended 52 individuals for appointment to various constitutional bodies on December 15, 2020, and May 9, 2021, when current Prime Minister and UML chair KP Sharma Oli was leading the government after dissolving the House of Representatives.
Then President Bidya Devi Bhandari appointed them without without parliamentary hearing.
Before recommending their names, a controversial amendment to the Constitutional Council (Functions, Duties, and Procedures) Act was made through an ordinance on December 15, 2020.
The recommendations were made by three—the prime minister, the National Assembly chairperson and the chief justice—of the six council members. Although there is a constitutional provision for mandatory parliamentary hearings, Bhandari appointed the commissioners based on the House regulation that a nominee is considered eligible for the nominated position if the parliamentary hearing committee fails to make a decision within 45 days.
Now, after the SC verdict endorsing the appointments, the political parties as well as the public are not happy. They argued that the SC Justices gave the verdict in favour of Prime Minister Oli. Even Sher Bahadur Deuba, Nepali Congress president, has expressed his dislike to the verdict. Deuba, who was then the main opposition leader, did not attend the Constitutional Council meeting, and Oli amended the Constitutional Council Act to avoid Deuba. Then Speaker Agni Sapkota and Deuba were in the Council. But Oli recommended the officials without these two. Maoist Centre boss Pushpa Kamal Dahal also criticised the verdict.
The decision clearly showed how PM Oli then had captured the constitutional bodies and how the SC approved it four years after their appointments.
Login to add a comment