HIMALAYAN NEWS SERVICE
KATHMANDU: The Supreme Court today sought explanation from authorities in relation to judges’ appointment without parliamentary hearing.
Parliamentary hearing is a must to appoint judges, but in the absence of Parliament, concerns have grown whether the judiciary will face a vacuum.
A single bench of Justice Ram Kumar Prasad Shah today issued show cause notices in the name of the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, the Ministry of Law, Justice, Parliamentary and Federal Affairs, Judicial Council and the Parliament Secretariat to submit explanations in writing in 15 days. The bench has also referred the case to the full bench comprising more than three judges and scheduled it as priority for a final hearing.
Noting that the point raised by petitioner Rajesh Silwal is a serious constitutional issue, the bench stated that there was a need to decide the importance of parliamentary hearing in the context of international practices and national experiences. Advocate Silwal had filed a PIL seeking an apex court intervention to find a suitable way out to appoint judges without parliamentary hearing. According to Article 155 of the Interim Constitution, prior to appointing someone in constitutional bodies, s/he must face the parliamentary hearing. Stating that parliamentary hearing was impossible in the absence of Parliament, the petitioner had sought SC intervention .
Besides the chief justice, the SC, which can accommodate 25 judges, has six permanent and seven temporary judges. One permanent judge and all seven temporary judges will retire by January, and failure to replace them could invite a huge crisis, hampering even day to day hearings.