Opinion Governance in chains
It is now clear that elections alone cannot set everything right in Nepal
It is now clear that elections alone cannot set everything right in Nepal
Last week,Nepals Acting Chief Justice Damodar Sharma clarified that the Supreme Court was only trying to curb the unauthorised movement of undesirable elements within the court premises. His response came in the wake of critical references in the Bar as well as the media community about the SC annulling all entry passes issued to journalists recently,days after a journalist was asked to leave the courtroom for not being decently dressed.
The SC faces arguably the most strident criticism in its history from the media and civil society in the wake of Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmis taking over as the chairman of the council of ministers in March. Hearing on petitions challenging Regmis appointment as the executive head,on the plea that it is in violation of the principle of separation of powers,has been deferred fifteen times. No one seems to be ready to give Regmi the benefit of doubt on this repeated deferral.
The CJs taking over as executive head is not the only aberration. A senior advocate and former chairman of the Nepal Bar Association,arguing in a case against a presidential appointee for the anti-graft constitutional body,is also a leading face of the protests demanding annulment of the appointment. This naturally has affected the normally cordial relations between the judges and the Bar on one hand and the judges and the media on the other. Confrontation looms large.
The Supreme Court faces arguably the most strident criticism in its history from the media and civil society.
I know in principle the CJs appointment as prime minister is wrong. But can the Supreme Court call it unconstitutional and void when the interim constitution that we have has no provision of electing a prime minister when the legislative body does not exist? a sitting judge confides. Nevertheless,we not only wished but also advised Regmi against taking up the executive post, he adds. That explains the predicament of the judiciary and its repeated deferring of the hearing.
A helpless SC under attack is not a healthy guarantee for democracy. When credibility of the judiciary is low,and its independence compromised,can elections alone set everything right? Thats the big question the president,the PM and the four major parties in favour of the election have failed to answer convincingly. Moreover,the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML) insist on barring those convicted of murder and other heinous crimes from contesting something the Maoists are reluctant to accept. The parties credibility,and that of the president and CJ,is at its lowest ebb. The government hasnt yet taken any position on criminals right to contest polls,but Regmi seems to look like a rubber stamp of the Maoist party.
The international community is not above criticism for its active lobbying in favour of Regmi. Why is the international community,most of them democratic countries like India,the UK,the US and Scandinavian countries where the judiciary is independent,keen to damage the reputation of Nepals judiciary? asks Kedar Narsingh K.C.,former chief of Nepals Medical Association and a prominent civil society leader.
The murder of former lawmaker Sadrul Miya Haque on Tuesday shows the environment of risk contestants may face during the electioneering. The leaders seem to have begun reading the message on the wall and fearing the worst as public anger is directed against them.
yubaraj.ghimire@expressindia.com
Share
