Kathmandu, December 13 As per the constitutional provision, a candidate who has been defeated in the parliamentary first-past-the-post election can become a member of the Upper House of the Parliament or a candidate for the president and vice-president, but he/she cannot become a minister in the new Cabinet. The Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2007 had not placed any such restriction. Madhav Kumar Nepal who had lost Constituent Assembly elections in 2008 later became a member of the CA and even the prime minister. According to Article 78 (4) of the constitution,  a person who has been defeated in the election to the then House of Representatives shall not be qualified to be appointed to the office of minister as mentioned in clause (1) during the term of such House of Representatives.  But if any political party elects their members, who have lost parliamentary FPTP election, to the Upper House of the Parliament, then such a person can become a member of the Parliament but cannot become a minister in the Cabinet. Article 78 (1)    of the constitution stipulates that the president may, on recommendation of the prime minister, appoint a person who is not a member of the Federal Parliament as a minister but such a minister must obtain membership of the Federal Parliament within six months from the date of taking oath by him or her. Article 78 (3) of the constitution stipulates:  In the event of failure to obtain membership of the Federal Parliament within the period mentioned in clause (2), he or she shall not be qualified to be reappointed to the office of minister during the term of the then House of Representatives. Senior Advocate Chandra Kanta Gyawali said the new constitution’s provision that barred those who have lost House of Representatives elections was in line with a legal doctrine of ‘no taxation without representation.’ “If a candidate lost parliamentary FPTP election, this means voters did not want him/her to be their representative and if such a defeated candidate later becomes a minister and if the Cabinet imposes taxes on the citizens of the country which it often does, then that is against the principle of representation,” he added. The term no taxation without representation was first coined by the Americans against the British colonial rule that attempted to heavily tax Americans, which later became a reason for the American Revolution for independence.