Nepal: As CJ’s Impeachment Motion Finally Sent to Probe Committee, Questions About Timing

Opposition lawmakers asked the ruling parties and the speaker why the motion was kept on hold for months and was presented only after the government announced the date for elections.

Nearly six months after its registration at the parliament secretariat, the impeachment motion against Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher Rana was forwarded to the Impeachment Recommendation Committee on Sunday following a discussion in the House of Representatives.

The committee will now probe the allegations against Rana. As many as 98 lawmakers of the ruling coalition – Nepali Congress, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) and the CPN (Unified Socialist) – had on February 13 registered the motion against Rana with 21 charges including that he promoted corruption in the judiciary and failed to discharge his duties effectively. Rana was automatically suspended following the registration of the motion.

After sitting on the motion for months, the ruling parties presented it for discussion in the House on Sunday and forwarded it to the recommendation committee. The recommendation committee to investigate the allegations against Rana was constituted on March 6.

Taking part in deliberations, lawmakers of the main opposition CPN-UML asked the ruling parties and the speaker why the motion was kept on hold for months and was presented only after the government announced the date for elections.

Mahesh Basnet, a UML lawmaker, said the fact that the motion has been presented for discussions while the tenure of the lower house is nearing its expiry shows the ruling parties registered it to serve their vested interests.

“It was wrong to keep the motion on hold for months despite the pressure from our party and civil society to settle it through the parliamentary process,” said Basnet. “It has been presented for processing while the term of the House is coming to an end.”

The government on Thursday announced that federal and provincial elections will be held on November 20. There is a debate going on about whether the House can function after the election date is announced.

The recommendation committee has a maximum of three months to investigate the allegations and present its report before it is put to a vote.

Rule 163 of the Regulations of the House of Representatives allows the recommendation committee a maximum of three months, from the day it starts work, to probe the allegations.

Ruling party leaders say the motion couldn’t be presented because the UML obstructed the House while the government had to focus on the national budget after the obstruction was lifted.

“The recommendation committee can conclude the probe in two weeks if there is consensus among the parties,” Min Bishwakarma, the Congress whip who is also a member of the committee, told the Post. “We want the House to vote on the motion before its tenure expires.”

The ruling parties are for continuing the House meeting until Dashain (mid-October) as the terms of lawmakers do not expire until the Election Commission begins registering candidacies for elections.

UML lawmakers, however, say it is not possible to conclude the investigations in two weeks as claimed by Congress lawmakers. Shiva Maya Tumbahangphe, who also is a member of the committee, said the lawmakers have already started visiting their constituencies after the poll dates were announced. Therefore, they cannot fully devote themselves to the investigation.

Three of the UML lawmakers, who are on the recommendation committee, are currently touring their constituencies. “The ruling parties neither consulted us while registering the motion in Parliament nor before presenting it today [Sunday],” Tumbahangphe told the Post. “The impeachment motion is a sensitive issue which needs to be probed seriously by following a due process.”

Officials at the parliament secretariat say it will take at least three-four days for the recommendation committee to hold its first meeting. And it will take a couple of more days to prepare the working procedure.

Laxmi Prasad Gautam, secretary for the recommendation committee, said the senior-most member of the committee will consult with members and call the first meeting.

“The committee will then prepare a working procedure and elect its coordinator before formally commencing its investigation,” he told the Post. “The chief justice will be called for his clarification on the charges and the committee may also consult experts.”

The 11-member committee has four lawmakers from the UML, two each from the Congress and the CPN (Maoist Centre) and one each from the CPN (Unified Socialist), the Janata Samajbadi Party and the Loktantrik Samajbadi Party. The committee will endorse its report in consensus or through a vote and submit it to Parliament, according to Gautam.

Experts on parliamentary affairs say completing the probe against Rana in 15 days, as claimed by Congress lawmakers, is impossible because the recommendation committee needs concrete evidence to impeach Rana and the process is time-consuming.

“The motion has been forwarded just to show that the ruling parties had at least tried to impeach Rana,” Surya Kiran Gurung, a former general secretary at the parliament secretariat, told the Post. “The motion won’t be put to a vote without the assurance of a two-thirds majority in its favour. However, the UML appears to be against the motion. So I think the term of the House will expire before taking any decision on the motion.”

The impeachment motion against Rana cannot be endorsed without the support of the UML, the main opposition, which has 98 lawmakers in the House. To impeach Rana, the motion needs to be passed by a two-thirds majority in the 271-strong House, for which 181 lawmakers must vote in its favour.

“The opposition lawmakers must be clear whether they stand with the motion or oppose it. We can endorse the motion if the UML wants. Time is not a problem,” said Haribol Gajurel, a Maoist Centre lawmaker in the House. “It seems the UML wants to protect Rana.”

This article was originally published in the Kathmandu Post.

A Day After SC Verdict, Nepal Still Faces Uncertainty Over Next Government

The court’s decision to strike down Oli’s dissolution of parliament led to a flurry of political reactions and relief among legal analysts in the Himalayan nation.

New Delhi: The Nepal Supreme Court’s landmark verdict to strike down the decision by Prime Minister K.P. Oli to dissolve the House of Representatives has led to a flurry of political reactions and relief among legal analysts in the Himalayan nation.

On Tuesday, the five-member constitutional bench led by Nepali Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher Rana unanimously observed that the dissolution was unconstitutional and called on authorities to summon the parliament within 13 days.

In December 2020, Oli had recommended that the House be dissolved as he had lost the confidence of the party. It was promptly approved by President Bidya Bandhari, with elections scheduled for March-April 2021.

The Kathmandu Post in an editorial said that the prime minister “must step down on moral grounds”. The newspaper observed that the verdict has “proved that the people can put their trust in the country’s judiciary and the competence of honourable justices”.

At the same time, the editorial posited a note of caution, even though the court had ensured that the ball was now in parliament’s corner. “But the problems are not over yet. There are too many players in the House with no one controlling a majority, and the risk of the dirty game of horse trading could start any time soon,” it wrote.

The House dissolution was the step taken by Oli just before another faction in the ruling party, led by Pushpa Kumar Dahal, tabled a no-confidence motion in the House.

Since December, the split in the party has become all but formal, with both sides having approached the Election Commission for recognition as the real Communist Party of Nepal (CPN).

After the SC judgement, the leader of the Oli faction in the CPN, foreign minister Pradeep Gyawali, said that the verdict was surprising, but that it will be respected. There had been victory processions by CPN members supporting the Dahal faction on the streets of the Nepalese capital.

In a Facebook post on Tuesday evening, Oli’s press adviser, Surya Thapa said that Oli will not resign immediately. “The Prime Minister will implement the decision by facing the House of Representatives,” he wrote.

There has been no public reaction from Oli himself.

Both splinter groups in the CPN have convened a meeting of their supporters on Wednesday to decide on future moves.

The Oli faction of the CPN’s standing committee announced after their meeting that the House of Representatives will be convened within 13 days, as stipulated by the apex court.

The formation of a new government requires at least 138 members in the House of Representatives.

The Communist Party of Nepal has 174 members. When Dahal’s faction registered the no-confidence motion on December 20, it had around 90 signatories.

It is unlikely that the principal opposition party, Nepali Congress, will vote against a no-confidence motion. With NC’s 63 members, it is theoretically an easy path for any resolution expressing no-confidence in Oli.

With Dahal having earlier offered the seat of prime minister to NC president Sher Bahadur Deuba, the formation of the new government would also have the required numbers on paper.

On Wednesday afternoon, Pushpa Kumar Dahal and Madhav Kumar Nepal, co-chairs of the CPN splinter group, met with Deuba at latter’s residence.

A news report in Republica, citing sources, said that the three leaders “discussed the possibility of the power-sharing deal in the coming days”. “Leaders dwelt on the contemporary political situation after the apex court issued a verdict against the dissolution of parliament,” Deuba told the media.