KATHMANDU, JULY 4

Judges and employees of Lalitpur District Court today gathered at the Supreme Court to tell the chief justice that they faced threats from the lawyers' fraternity and they were not in a position to carry out their daily work.

General Secretary of Nepal Bar Association Anjita Khanal, however, said Lalitpur District Court officials were blowing the issue out of proportion and illegally halting service delivery by creating obstruction in the dispensation of justice.

Registrar of Lalitpur District Court Bishnu Prasad Pandey said judges and employees returned to their jobs after the Supreme Court administration assured them that their concerns would be addressed.

Spokesperson for the Supreme Court Bimal Paudel said the chief justice told the employees and judges of Lalitpur District Court that the law would follow its course on the alleged scuffle, but court employees and judges should not halt services to the public as that could adversely impact the delivery of justice.

Bar and bench are at odds over the scuffle between Lalitpur District Court employee Premika Tamang and lawyer Amir Lamichhane on June 28. This issue has now snowballed into a bigger feud with employees, backed by career judges wanting more career judges to be appointed as high court and Supreme Court judges, and the Nepal Bar Association demanding more percentage of lawyers among the new judges of the high courts and the Supreme Court.

Three employees' unions based at the Attorney General's Office issued a joint press release today demanding respectable representation of employees of law, justice and government attorney group of legal service. They said lawyers should allowed to be appointed only as judges of high court and all SC justices should be nominated from among career judges. Trade unions said the current criteria for selection of high court and Supreme Court judges was flawed as very few career judges could reach the SC and even those who reach the SC, cannot become the CJ.

Chair of National Employees Organisation, Supreme Court, Hari Bhattarai said that often political parties favoured lawyers for the position of chief justice and very few career judges got the chance to become the leader of the judiciary.

The NBA however, countered the employees' views on the appointment of judges. 'The appointment of judges is not a promotion, so employees should not seek share in judges' appointment,' NBA General Secretary Khanal added.

Senior Advocate Chandra Kanta Gyawali said the constitution stipulated that judges of the SC and high courts could be appointed from among lawyers, career judges and renowned jurists with expertise in the field of law. ' The spirit of the constitution is that anybody who is qualified and efficient, and can use judicial mind, are eligible for judgeship,' he said and added that the constitution did not deem the appointment of judges in the SC and high courts as an issue of promotion but only as an issue of appointment.

'This means there could be 100 per cent career judges/ government employees or 100 per cent lawyers or 100 per cent experts among the nominees for judgeship,' Gyawali added. Gyawali said that those demanding more percentage of judgeship for government employees/career judges in the high courts and SC were violating the constitution.

A version of this article appears in the print on July 5, 2023, of The Himalayan Times.